ftntttnrnHt 



W lHWf«»Mi* . <«*# «W >* »W ;trtMtiH^«S g^ 



t tnannmu t u 



'*\ f"*^: 



P 



i-,J 



f 



mgw niHtMiWw w mtM tst an 



A^'l! 1 y 



.^£1^ c/'£7MV RICHEISEN 




Pass ''' ^ - ' J< 

Book ^_>\ 5 

GopightN" 



COPYRIGHT DEPOSITS 



A CERTAIN 
SAMARITAN 



BY 



REV. JOHN RICHELSEN 




BROADWAY PUBLISHING CO. 

835 Broadway, New York 

BRANCH OFFICES: CHICAGO. WASHINGTON, BALTIMORE, 
ATLANTA. NORFOLK. D£S MOINES. IOWA 



'\^ 



•v:P^ 



Copyright, 191 i, 

By 

JOHN RICHELSEN. 






'CU295010 



CHAPTER 


PAGE 


I. 


The Title of the Story . . 


• 9 


II. 


The Setting of the Story 


. 14 


III. 


The Priest and the Levite . 


. 19 


IV. 


The Humanitarian . . 


. 42 


V. 


The Heart of the Author . 


• 54 


VI. 


The Ground of Judgment 


. 68 


VII. 


"Do Thou Likewise" . . . 


. 88 



PREFACE. 

Jesus' story of ''A Certain Samaritan" is in 
itself sufficiently remarkable and inspiring to 
become the subject of many books and to be 
treated from various individual viewpoints. 
The author's justification for adding this book 
to the vast literature affecting the parables 
rests, however, on a more specific reason. 

This one parable has wisely been chosen, by 
a great fraternal organization, as the clearest 
exposition of those humanitarian teachings of 
Jesus which are the fundamental principles of 
the Order. The book is offered from the view- 
point of the Order itself, and is the result of 
many spoken messages delivered by the author 
at various times. 

There has been no thought of adding a 

scholarly contribution to biblical knowledge, 

but only of setting forth to the members of 

The Independent Order of Odd Fellows the 

5 



preface 



chief teachings of the parable, which fills so 
large a place in its life and activity. 

If this book shall add anything to the knowl- 
edge and love of the story, even to a sn^all pro- 
portion of the one million nine hundred thou- 
sand Odd Fellows in the United States, its pub- 
lication will be abundantly justified. 

Allison Park, Pa. 

February 2Sth, 191 1. 



''And Jesus answering said, 

'' 'A certain man went down from Jerusalem 
to Jericho, and fell among thieves, which 
stripped him of his raiment, and wounded him, 
and departed, leaving him half dead. And by 
chance there came down a certain priest that 
way: and when he saw him, he passed by on the 
other side. And likewise a Levite, when he 
was at the place, came and looked on him, and 
passed by on the other side. But a certain Sa- 
maritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: 
and when he saw him, he had compassion on 
him, and went to him, and bound up his 
wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him 
on his own beast, and brought him to an inn, 
and took care of him. And on the morrow 
when he departed, he took out two pence, and 
gave them to the host, and said unto him, 
''Take care of him; and whatsoever thou 
spendest more, when J come again, I will repay 
thee.'' Which now of these three, thinkest 
thou, was neighbor unto him that fell among 
the thieves r 

"And he said, 'He that showed mercy on 
him." 

"Then said Jesus unto him, 'Go, and do thou 
likewise.' " Luke lo : ^3,0-37. 



^ Certain Samaritan 



CHAPTER I. 

THE TITLE OF THE STORY. 

"But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, 
came . . . ." — Luke lo: 33. 

The exquisite story reported by Luke as 
taken from the lips of Jesus is commonly 
known as **The Good Samaritan.'* 

It is a noteworthy fact, however, that there 
is no authoritative title for this piece of fiction. 
The Author himself did not give it a name. 
The deficiency, as it might seem to be, has 
been met by Jesus' admirers, who have agreed 
on naming the story ''The Good Samaritan." 
This verdict has been unanimous. 

Clearly the title, thus imposed on the story, 
9 



a Certain ^amatftan 

declares the judgrnent of the world regarding 
the character of the hero and his central posi- 
tion in the parable. 

The stort story we are interested in might 
have become known to the world as "The Man 
Among the Thieves," or, more vaguely, by the 
general title, *'On the Jericho Road." Were 
Jesus' main object interpreted as being directed 
to the discrediting of the religious leaders of 
his day, the story might have been given the 
title, "The Hypocrite Priest and the Wicked 
Levite." Yet with unerring judgment those 
who read the parable have concurred in rec- 
ognizing Jesus' emphasis as being on the con- 
duct of the Samaritan. 

More clearly and decisively still does the 
title "The Good Samaritan" reveal the opin- 
ion of men regarding the character of this hero. 

The Author of the parable was content to 
describe his man as "a certain Samaritan." 
Jesus did not call him "good." Evidently Jesus 
thought it unnecessary to label his hero; he 
left that to others. 

The literary art of Jesus is shown in the 
way he deftly avoids tagging descriptive ad- 

10 



a €tttain ©amatitatt 

jectives to his chief character. He lets his 
hero act and talk for himself. 

In writing a letter to a young literary aspi- 
rant, an old writer advised : ^'Don't say *She 
was a snarling old woman,' but bring her in 
and let her act and talk so we'll be convinced 
for ourselves what kind of woman she is." 

The force of a eulogy is limited by the 
trustworthiness and reliability of the person 
pronouncing it. If Jesus called a man "good" 
we would believe it of the man because of the 
authority of Jesus. If any one else, however, 
calls a man "good," we reserve to ourselves 
the right of examining and questioning the 
verdict. In this case, Jesus did not desire to 
have the Samaritan acknowledged as "good" 
on his authority; he preferred to have the ver- 
dict come as a spontaneous conviction from 
those who were called upon to judge him ac- 
cording to his behavior. 

Life itself, after all, yields the only criterion 
for judgment. When a life stands completed 
and revealed, no eulogy can dissipate an im- 
pression of wickedness, nor can any praise add 
to the lustre of virtue. What would Jesus 
II 



a Certain ^amatftan 

have added in tribute to his hero, by stringing 
together a necklace of such pearls as "good, 
tolerant, noble, generous, forgiving,'^ and 
placing this adornment about the Samaritan's 
neck! The hero draws a more eager acclaim 
from us because he is portrayed in the story 
without jewels of eulogy or praise — "a certain 
Samaritan" — who reveals his character by his 
conduct. 

The delineation of this character is the work 
of the parable. That the author's task was 
successfully accomplished is certified to by the 
admiration which has followed without a dis- 
senting voice. Jesus' hero has become the 
world's model. 

The influence of "The Good Samaritan'* 
story has been incalculable. Among the most 
precious evidences of Christianity we number 
the rise and growth of the many charitable and 
beneficent institutions which spring up like 
flowers on the pathways where Jesus has 
walked. Hospitals, orphanages, homes for the 
aged, asylums for the blind, the halt, the lame ; 
these are the concrete evidences of the spirit 
of Christianity. They testify to the vitality 

12 



a Certain Samaritan 

of our religion more eloquently than do sky- 
piercing church spires. 

Of all the sayings of Jesus which have pro- 
duced and stimulated activity for charity and 
beneficence, undoubtedly we must place first of 
all the story of Jesus called "The Good Sa- 
maritan." 



13 



CHAPTER II. 

THE SETTING OF THE STORY. 

"The Good Samaritan" does not claim to 
be a "true" story. A parable is not a record 
of an actual occurrence. Yet the parable of- 
fers a better vehicle for an author's self-reve- 
lation than does the true story with a moral 
tagged to it. For if Jesus had merely re- 
hearsed an incident that had come within his 
observation, adding his comments on it, we 
would have felt that the mind of Jesus was 
revealed to us only in so far as the point of 
the moral was concerned. 

But a "manufactured" story may be thor- 
oughly scrutinized for traits of the processes 
of the author's mind. For here the various 
elements that go into th^ making of the story 
are consciously created. In a true story one 
has to accept the material as it is found, and it 
were impossible, even in the widest knowledge 
14 



a Certain Siamatitan 

of life, to find exactly the characters and the 
setting and the development of action that 
would suit the purpose so exactly as an author 
might construct for himself. 

The staging of the scenes of this story was 
not done in a haphazard or indifferent fash- 
ion. There is purpose in creating the hero 
of the Samaritan blood; in setting his con- 
duct in contrast to that of a priest and a Levite 
— rather than in having three Jews contrasted 
— as also in having the theatre of action on 
the way from Jerusalem to Jericho. The local 
color of the story is premeditated, and there- 
fore revealing. 

That Jesus would deliberately make a Sa- 
maritan the hero of his story, testifies most 
eloquently to his daring and courage. Less 
distasteful would it have been to the self- 
righteous and supercilious Jews had Jesus 
made a heroine of a harlot. 

An indication of the resentment felt against 
this choice of a hero is seen when Jesus, at the 
close of his narrative, drives his questioner 
into a corner and compels a confession from 
him. Jesus asks, "Which now of these three 

15 



a Certain ©amatftan 

was neighbor to him that fell among 
thieves?" Even then the lawyer squirms out 
of paying just tribute to an enemy and dodges 
the word "Samaritan." He answers evasively 
and abstractly, '*He that showed mercy on 
him." 

"The Jews have no dealings with the Sa- 
maritans," was the explanation John offered 
for the conduct of the Samaritan woman at 
Jacob's well. John stated the case conserva- 
tively. A common prayer in the Jewish syna- 
gogue was worded, "May I never set eyes on 
a Samaritan !" and "May I never be thrown in 
company with a Samaritan!" All intercourse 
with the Samaritans was forbidden. Con- 
tempt, assumed superiority, disdainful self- 
righteousness, marked the attitude of the Jews 
toward this people. The bread of the Sa- 
maritans was declared to be just like swine's 
flesh. It was vehemently asserted that the 
Samaritans would have no share in the resur- 
rection of the dead. 

On their part, the Samaritans returned the 
compliment and strove to give good measure 
of retaliation^ > 

'i6 



a Certain §)amatitan 

The Jews had a system of fire signals for 
announcing the beginning of the month. The 
Jewish feasts and customs made it a very im- 
portant matter to have the calendar correct. 
A fire was kindled on the Mount of Olives, 
at the exact period, and then the signal was 
flashed, from mountain top to mountain top, 
to convey the intelligence. The Samaritans 
took delight in confusing this whole system by 
starting beacon fires at the wrong time. 

Josephus also tells us that the Samaritans 
not only refused hospitality to Jewish pilgrims, 
but were guilty of waylaying and murdering 
Jews on their journeys from Galilee to Jeru- 
salem. The prejudice of both Samaritans and 
Jews is clearly seen in the account presented 
by Luke (9: 51). The Samaritans refused 
to permit Jesus and his disciples to enter a 
little border village, because they were on their 
way to Jerusalem. And the Jewish spirit was 
made painfully clear in the request of the dis- 
ciples, "Lord wilt thou that we command fire 
to come down from heaven and consume 
them?" 

Jesus' courage in delineating the character 
17 



g Certain Samaritan 

of the good Samaritan needs no further com- 
ment. To say that the local color was bold and 
daring, is to put the case mildly. One might 
equally well suggest that waving a red flag 
before the eyes of a bull is somewhat of a 
challenge. We realize that if Jesus had not 
fascinated the people by his transparent devo- 
tion to God and love for all mankind the rulers 
would have crucified him sooner than they did. 
It is not by accident that one Samaritan and 
two Jews form the characters of the story. 
Jesus might as well have created the characters 
of three Jews, two unbrotherly Jews and a 
merciful one; but then that would not have 
served his purpose so exactly. The characters 
were created by him, not forced upon him; 
and therefore their very existence is illuminat- 
ing and not merely incidental. 



i8 



CHAPTER III. 

THE PRIEST AND THE LEVITE. 

The image of the good Samaritan rises 
sharply from the background in which Jesus 
set him. Had Jesus created the characters of 
three Samaritans, the lustre of the hero would 
have been dimmed. The Jews would merely 
have admitted that one Samaritan out of 
three might have some human kindness. Had 
Jesus confined his creation to the single char- 
acter of the one Samaritan, without setting 
him in bold relief against the other two Jews, 
the appeal could not have been so striking. It 
might have been said that the Samaritan did 
only what a Jew at any time would volunteer 
to do. Jesus created such other characters as 
would magnify the effect of his hero's virtues. 

The two types drawn upon for background 
material were taken from the highest ranks of 
Jewish religious life — the priest and the Levite. 

19 



a Cettafn g)amarltan 

Nor do we for a moment suppose that Jesus 
meant to insinuate that these two men were 
morally bad. Of course Jesus brought con- 
demnation upon their heads. He did not ex- 
onerate them. Yet the statute they trans- 
gressed was not in the Decalogue. 

We may believe of the priest and the Levite 
that they worshipped the true God, and were 
not idolators, nor blasphemers, nor Sabbath 
breakers, nor disobedient to parents. They 
were not thieves, murderers, adulterers, false- 
witness bearers, nor covetous of their neigh- 
bors' property. We may assume, if we choose, 
that they kept the Ten Commandments invio- 
late,*and were perfect in the observance of all 
ceremonial requirements. 

Jesus does not say a word in condemnation 
of the priest or the Levite. He permits one 
to judge for himself. H they were to be con- 
sidered as wicked men, there would be noth- 
ing to surprise one in their conduct on the 
Jericho road. But if they represented the high- 
est religious type among the Jews, then a de- 
cided repugnance would be awakened against 
the standard of their righteousness. 
20 



It is a mistake to pass over the delineation 
of these two characters with a generalization 
that they were evil men. We must recognize 
that the priest and the Levite were not the 
robbers. They had not done the injured man 
any harm. The villainy was not laid at their 
door. Nor is it pressing the point very far 
to suppose that the priest and the Levite might 
have been sorely grieved over the wicked deed 
which had been committed. 

Jesus did not here choose his characters 
from a class which at other times he con- 
demned for wickedness and hypocrisy. Had 
he said "a Pharisee passed by on the other 
side," we would instantly note how Jesus was 
again flaying the men he repeatedly stigma- 
tized as hypocrites. Were it '*a Scribe" who 
had followed in the Pharisee's wake, it would 
have brought to our ears echoes of his "whited 
sepulchres" denunciation. But Jesus did not 
choose his characters from a class of men dis- 
tinguished for wickedness. That is not his 
point of view. 

Jesus' denunciation is not of wickedness so 
much as of inefficiency. The attack is not on 
21 



a Certain Samaritan 

the sins of commission, but on the sins of 
omission, which were not usually regarded as 
an integral part of righteousness. His conten- 
tion was not so much with wicked men as with 
a wicked standard. 

Jesus never denounced any priests or Le- 
vites. Not a word of censure against either 
class of men ever fell from his lips. John the 
Baptist was the son of a priest. The priests 
and Levites formed a great proportion of the 
common people, and Jesus did not condemn 
them. In fact, the priests as a class seem to 
have been susceptible to Jesus' message. After 
the Pentecost story, in Acts, we read, "A great 
number of the priests were obedient to the 
faith." 

If we press the inquiry, ''What, then, 
prompted the priest and Levite to pass by?" 
we have offered us a number of reasons from 
which we may choose. Or we may decide that 
several reasons were combined in determining 
their conduct. 



2.2 



91 Certain Samaritan 

^A. The Fear of Defilement. 

It has been suggested frequently that the con- 
duct of the priest and the Levite might be ex- 
plained by the Jewish law concerning defile- 
ment. Ceremonial uncleanness resulted from 
contact with blood or a corpse. The two Jews 
may well have supposed that the bleeding man 
was dying, if not already dead. 

The law of the Lord was clearly stated: 
''He that toucheth the dead body of any man 
shall be unclean seven days." (Num. 19: 11.)^ 

Now, by coming in contact with a corpse, 
and thus transgressing this statute, the priest 
and the Levite would have been barred for a 
week from offering the temple sacrifice. It 
became, therefore, no small consideration to 
them. This temple service may have seemed 
to them the greater duty, making even the dic- 
tates of decency and humanity appear of less 
account. If this be so, it illustrates the fright- 
ful lack of insight into the will of God. 

Jesus repeatedly diagnosed the religious vi- 
sion of the Jews as suffering from astigma- 
tism. It was near-sighted. The Jews had no 
23 



a Certain ^amantait 

perception of proportions. There was neither 
breadth of heart nor sweep of vision. Jesus' 
first conflict with the Jews arose when he 
pushed out beyond their horizon in the syna- 
gogue of Nazareth. 

The harmonizing of minute regulations with 
great religious fundamentals was a task for 
which they were incompetent. ''Ye pay tithe 
of mint and anise and cummin, and have omit- 
ted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, 
mercy, and faith." — Jesus, in Mat. 23: 23. 

That the Jews, from a study of the Old Tes- 
tament, should have arrived at Jesus' view of 
God and his requirements, seems demonstrable. 
But, however that may be, the Jews and Jesus 
so differed in interpreting the spirit of religion, 
that a common source of knowledge would not 
easily be suspected. 

Jesus' position was simple and clean-cut. 
All religious laws, he held, should be inter- 
preted in accordance with the fundamental 
tenets of supreme love to God, and a love for 
one's fellow men. In the religion of Jesus, 
the service of man was the only true service of 
God. He approached the matter of temple 
24 



a Certain Samaritan 

service in the spirit of the prophet Micah: 
''Wherewith shall I come before the Lord, and 
bow myself before the high God? shall I come 
before him with burnt offerings, with calves 
of a year old? 

"Will the Lord be pleased with thousands of 
rams, or with ten thousands of rivers of oil? 
Shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, 
the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul? 

"He hath showed thee, O man, what is good ; 
and what doth the Lord require of thee, but 
to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk 
humbly with thy God?" (Micah, Chapter 6.) 

"To love mercy," the priest and the Levite 
should have known, would please their God far 
more than regularity in temple service. These 
church officers might also have recalled the 
w^ords of the prophet Hosea (6: 6) : "I will 
have mercy and not sacrifice." A New Testa- 
ment writer expressed the same Old Testa- 
ment spirit in the words : "He that loveth not 
his brother whom he hath seen, how can he 
love God whom he hath not seen?" (I John, 
4: 20.) 

If the priest and the Levite refused succor 
25 



a Certain g^amaritan 

for fear of defilement, Jesus' criticism of their 
conduct would be on the principle which he 
frequently indicated; namely, that any law or 
custom coming in conflict with the demands of 
human love is to yield to the latter. 

Jesus' treatment of the Sabbath law illu- 
minates this principle. The strict observance 
of the day of rest was the revealed will of God. 
Jesus had no thought of questioning the valid- 
ity of the ordinance: *'Six days shalt thou 
labor and do all thy work, but the seventh is 
the Sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou 
shalt not do any work." (Exodus 20: 9, 10.) 
This statute belonged to the fundamental law 
of God. 

Yet when the Jews contended for the ob- 
servance of this law of God to the extent of 
criticizing Jesus for healing a man on the Sab- 
bath day, or for permitting his disciples to 
pluck a few grains of corn on the Sabbath day, 
he justified his attitude in these words: "The 
Sabbath was made for man and not man for 
the Sabbath." (Mark 2: 27.) 

The regulations for the ceremonial "clean- 
liness" of the temple officers served excellent 

2(i 



a Certain Siamaritatt 

moral ends. Like the Sabbath laws, they 
formed an integral part of God's revelation. 
Yet when circumstances arose which brought 
these regulations into conflict with the primary 
duty of human love, the former should have 
yielded to this latter and greater duty. And 
in not being able to realize this and act upon 
it, the standard of their conduct was discred- 
ited. 

It need not be supposed, however, that this 
law of ''defilement" exhausts the possible ex- 
planations for the conduct of these Jewish 
officers. 

B. The Barrier of Class Distinction. 

It is sufficiently evident that neither the 
priest nor the Levite thought of the injured 
man as his brother. The regulation concern- 
ing "uncleanness" would hardly have re- 
strained a man with red blood corpuscles from 
going to the assistance of his brother in such 
desperate distress. If either of these men 
could have referred to the injured fellow as a 
''brother," it would only have been by emascu- 
27 



a Cettain %amatitan 

lating the word "brother" and reducing it to 
an insipid and vague generalization. 

True, the priest may have argued, theoreti- 
cally, for the brotherhood of man — at least of 
Jewish men; but the m.atter was of the head 
rather than of the heart. It is possible to per- 
suade oneself into noble sentiments about the 
welfare of mankind; to love and care for all 
men in the abstract — ^'bunched," as it were — 
without having the least personal interest in 
one's brothers. 

There is always a great temptation for men 
of a distinct and separate class to grow out of 
sympathetic touch with their fellow men, es- 
pecially with those not of their class. Such 
as live a comparatively secluded life, not en- 
tering into the sorrows and the joys, the limi- 
tations and the points of view of other men, 
are unable to understand or feel with others. 
The entire Jewish race, for instance, formed 
such an exclusive sort of "class," and was en- 
meshed in the "class" narrowness toward other 
groups of men. 

"Reformers" from the ranks of "separated" 
groups, when they speak about politics, usu- 
28 



g Certain Samaritan 

ally refer vaguely to the "masses." Now 
your practical politician knows nothing about 
"masses." He knows a thousand different 
"Toms," and "Dicks," and understands how to 
serve them and be served in return. Where- 
fore the "reformer" usually fails because 
absence of living sympathy with the people is 
painfully evident; and the people prefer being 
plundered by a politician to being "massed" 
and patronized by a reformer. 

The question asked by the lawyer seems to 
have sprung from this very soil of class dis- 
tinction. "Who then is my neighbor?" was 
the query that drew from Jesus' heart the story 
of "A Certain Samaritan." The lawyer 
wanted a definition. His very attitude shows 
that the question was born out of a desire for 
intellectual quibbling — mental gymnastics. He 
hoped to get an argument, not an illustration. 
The abstract would have interested him more 
than the concrete. To be told that conduct, 
under the circumstances of a given case, solved 
the matter without a definition, was not pal- 
atable. 

This, then, is the peculiar temptation of 
29 



^ 



g Cettain Samaritan 

"shielded" lives. The welfare of mankind, as 
a whole, becomes a matter of intellectual in- 
quiry rather than of deep heart sympathy. 
The priest and the Levite had become so alien- 
ated from the common life of men that their 
active sympathy had decayed. 

'The Good Samaritan" is not yet an obso- 
lete story. Its mission will not be fulfilled 
until men grasp more clearly the broader sig- 
nificance and application of the parable. 

Men cannot afford to get out of sympathetic 
touch with their fellow men. Rich, deep, full 
life can only be achieved by identifying oneself 
with the common welfare of mankind. '*No 
man liveth to himself." God has created us 
social animals. We are not economically inde- 
pendent of each other. No man can supply 
all his physical needs for himself. He must 
depend on the activities of others. This is the 
law of God. It is no less true of our spiritual 
life. We cannot attain unto the highest char- 
acter by a life of separation. The cloister 
would prove a failure even were it universally 
practicable. 

There is a saying of Goethe which runs: 
30 



a Certain Samaritan 

*'Es bildet ein Talent sich in der Stille, doch ein 
Character in dem Strom der Welt." ("A tal- 
ent may be created in solitude, but a character 
only in the current of the world.") 

Goethe realized the blessings of the quiet 
and retired life. Shielded from adversities 
and cares, protected from the intrusion of fel- 
low men with their burdens and vexations and 
questioning, such solitude creates the atmos- 
phere most conducive to the development of 
talent. If a man desire to become a writer, a 
painter, a sculptor, let him find a quiet retreat 
where the muses may be cultivated and the 
longed-for gifts be nurtured and exercised. 

Yet such a life of solitude does not make for 
robust character. The lives of the world's 
gifted artists are the testimony to this truth. 
We admire wonderful paintings; the poetic 
thoughts of architects expressed in marble and 
stone fascinate us ; we are thrilled by the mar- 
vellous powers of the human voice. We real- 
ize that the achievement of these artistic tri- 
umphs was possible only after years of hard 
and concentrated labor which was necessarily 
performed in solitude. But let us refrain from 
31 



a Certain giamaritan 

asking questions about the artists themselves, 
unless we would be robbed of the enjoyment 
of their art. Seldom do we find the soul of the 
artist as beautiful as his work; marital infelici- 
ties and conjugal infidelities seem to be taken 
as a matter of course in connection with highly 
artistic temperaments. 

Character is created only in the current of 
the world. Sympathy is awakened by the ex- 
istence and knowledge of sorrow. Love is a 
social passion, and demands two persons to 
begin with. Only the man who withstands the 
chance to steal may be spoken of as honest. 
Sympathy, love and honesty are not developed 
in the isolated life. Character is developed 
only by resistance to evil. To be innocent of 
evil, because there has been no strong tempta- 
tion, is no achievement. Such innocency is 
not character. It is vacuity. An innocent per- 
son is not trustworthy, for there has been no 
trial to test him. But the man who has re- 
sisted great and sore temptations has developed 
a character on which reliance may be placed. 

Character, not innocence, is the highest at- 
tainment of man. This is not the place to 
32 



a Certain ©amatitan 

pursue an inquiry regarding the permission of 
evil to exist in this world, nor the end which 
is served by it. Yet it belongs within the le- 
gitimate scope of our subject to note that evil 
offers the medium of resistance, whereby we 
develop from innocency to character, from the 
weak state of indeterminateness to positive- 
ness. And unless we believe the history of 
the world to be but a chronicle of the triumph 
of the Devil over God, and of the baffling of 
the will of the Almighty, we must conclude 
that the presence of evil is included in God's 
plan for the development of his creatures. At 
any rate, the existence of evil is necessary for 
the forming of character as man is constituted. 
No man will attain to character without bat- 
tling against the wickedness of the world. He 
must be tempted before he can be proof against 
temptation. This is the explanation of James' 
rather odd-sounding advice, "My brethren, 
courjt it all joy when ye fall into divers tempta^ 
tions." (James 1:2.) And again, "Blessed 
is the man that endureth temptation, for when 
he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life." 
(James i :-i2.) 

33 



a Cettain giamatitan 



•C The Sin of Cowardice. 

The Ten Commandments do not cover every 
form of sin. No catalogue of prohibitions 
were complete without including the sin of 
cowardice. Such a statute should read: 
*'Thou shalt not be a coward, nor value thy 
skin so highly that thou refrain from risking 
its damage in behalf of thy brother." 

We have examined the matters of "defile- 
ment" and of ''class distinction" as bearing on 
the conduct of the priest and the Levite. Per- 
haps there may have been combined with these 
considerations the more simple but not less 
powerful motive of fear. Indeed we may 
choose to believe that cowardice explains most 
of the matter. Fear plays a great part in the 
actions of men. 

Here, again, it need not be predicated of 
these Jewish officials that they were brutal. 
They had not harmed the traveller; nor were 
they unmindful of his afflictions. They may 
well have been distressed by this evidence that 
robbers infested the mountain fastnesses so 

34 



g Certain §)amatitan 

near the Holy City. Human kindness would 
prompt them to an errand of mercy. 

If our final theory be tenable, each officer 
was abruptly checked in his charitable impulse 
by a consideration of his own personal safety. 
Each reasoned, as he drew near, that the rob- 
bers might not have departed. Perhaps the 
highwaymen were looking down on the pass 
from behind some rocky fortress on the moun- 
tainside. Should these scoundrels see any one 
else lingering in this spot, very likely they 
would again descend to rob and maltreat. 

Human nature in all of us testifies to the 
fact that having once hesitated in the path of 
duty to consider personal welfare, other rea- 
sons easily suggest themselves to justify the 
desired course. The conduct which would con- 
demn us as cowards is explained as refraining 
from "defilement." Being afraid, we find ex- 
cuses to persuade us that we should not go on 
the errand of mercy. 

This story of "A Certain Samaritan" has 
often been dramatized. The failure to empha- 
size the element of fear has seemed a deficiency 
in many of the presentations we have wit- 
35 



a Certain Samaritan 

nessed. If we were given charge of the dram- 
atization, we would surely introduce the ele- 
ment of cowardice to explain the conduct of 
at least one of these two men who passed by 
on the other side. Let one man, by disdaining 
to besmirch his hands and garments, repre- 
sent the idea of ''class separation" and "de- 
filement." But let the other man start to help 
the sufferer. Let him be intent on reaching the 
man and extending aid. Then, as Peter began 
to sink the moment his eyes left Jesus and be- 
held the great waves, so this man's resolutions 
sink as soon as he realizes the nature of the 
place in which he finds himself. He glances 
up the mountainside. Imagination clothes the 
vague objects at the sides of the rocks as brig- 
ands lurking to see whether the next traveller 
is going to keep on his own way, or is going 
to stop and concern himself about the wounded 
man's condition. 

The officer perhaps also realized that he 
himself might be implicated in the crime that 
had been committed. Therefore, he decides, 
on the basis of the half truth ''Discretion is the 
better part of valor," that he had better mind 

36 



a Certain ©amatitan 

his own business and pass on. Had this priest, 
or Levite, kept his eye on his fellow man, in- 
stead of looking toward the mountains, prob- 
ably his conduct would have been different. 

On the basis of common human nature, this 
latter explanation is plausible. At any rate, 
it does not seem likely that Jesus would have 
given two examples of the same kind of con- 
duct. The element of physical fear is too nat- 
ural to be buried altogether in favor of more 
complex motives. 

The element of fear must be taken into ac- 
count in all the refusals to emulate the example 
of "A Certain Samaritan." This is patent 
to every one who stops to analyze the motives 
underlying men's conduct. 

Men who could not, by any usual standards, 
be considered wicked, nevertheless are sons of 
this Levite. Neither the priest nor the Levite 
were childless. Their kin are among us. They 
are not bad men, in the sense that they would 
blaspheme, desecrate the Sabbath, steal, com- 
mit adultery, kill, rob, or covet. The Ten 
Commandments are sacred to them; and they 
fulfil the laws of the church. lYet in this they 
32 



a Certain §)amatitan 

are no better than their progenitors, the priest 
or the Levite of this story, for we may pre- 
sume that they also were blameless in the law. 
Such men are not bad, they are simply cow- 
ards. But Jesus seems to hold such cowardice 
as blameworthy as gross wickedness. 

Have w^e come to think of courage — physical 
courage — as a sort of voluntary and extraor- 
dinary virtue; a work of supererogation; not 
demanded of every man, but only an additional 
glory to a man ? Can we not be persuaded that 
the absence of physical courage at the needed 
moment is simply sinf Civilization often 
damns its beneficiaries with physical and moral 
flabbiness. Culture is a fraud if it creates 
such a fear of a broken nose, or repulsion for 
a blackened eye, that one becomes persuaded to 
leave his fellow man dying by the roadside 
rather than to risk one's skin. Such a result 
of culture can scarcely be pleasing to the Al- 
mighty — if Jesus has revealed God's way of 
thinking. 

The writer would not like to be understood 
as holding a brief for the prize-fighter or 
bruiser. His own inclinations veer decidedly 

38 



a Certain S)amatttan 

away from any exaltation of physical strength 
or glorification of brute force. Yet this story^ 
of Jesus, and the very life of Jesus himself, 
impels one to recognize that physical cowardice 
leads by the primrose path to moral cowardice. 
The cultured and refined Erasmus of Rotter- 
dam, contemporary of Martin Luther, in an 
age that called for heroism, answered simply: 
'T have no vocation for martyrdom." He felt 
himself too valuable an offering for the stake. 

Physical courage may be the first require- 
ment of Godliness. The absence of it pre- 
pares the path for ''passing by on the other 
side" in physical safety. Do you think this 
is too primitive, barbaric, uncivilized? Is it 
unworthy of appeal to refined people? 

There never was culture or refinement or 
sensitiveness equal to that which was in Jesus 
Christ. By his heavenly lineage, his inherent 
refinement, he was superior to any man who 
ever lived. If any one were entitled to exemp- 
tion from contact with the brutal, the vulgar, 
the base, Jesus might justly have spared him- 
self. For his soul shrank from it with unut- 
terable loathing. *Tf it be possible let this cup 
39 



a Certain Samaritan 

pass from me," he prayed. If we abhor blas- 
phemy and shrink from the brutal, what must 
these have been for him? For he was con- 
scious of his heavenly origin and was ac- 
quainted with the majestic prerogatives of the 
King of Kings and Lord of Lords. 

For mankind, sore and bruised and half 
dead on the roadside, Jesus exposed his ears 
to the shrieking blasphemy of devils and dev- 
ilish men; his eyes were removed from the 
stars to behold putrifying leprosy, and his un- 
gloved hands touched the lepers. He did not 
shrink from the thorn crown, from the re- 
pulsive spittle of anger-crazed brutes, nor the 
gore of a crucifixion. To have been too re- 
fined to endure this brutality, would have 
meant the vitiating of his Messianic career. 

Do you think a man may be excused from 
being a savior to a fallen and bruised fellow 
man on the plea of his refinement? God for- 
bid that any man think himself higher than 
Jesus. Had Paul been as Erasmus, he would 
have denied the resurrection many times before 
offering his "refined" body to the treatment 
Paul recites in 2 Cor. 11 : 24: "Of the Jews 

40 



a Certain §)amatttan 

five times received I forty stripes save one. 
Thrice was I beaten with rods, once was I 
stoned." But the world can better spare a 
thousand men like the brilliant philosopher of 
Rotterdam, than one Paul of Tarsus. 

If a man "pass by on the other side" because 
of his dread of physical harm, let him not seek 
an excuse for his cowardice. The culture and 
gentleness of Jesus did not make him a phys- 
ical coward, any more than it made him a 
moral coward. 

The good Samaritan, in every-day life, is 
willing to risk bodily discomfiture when the 
plight of any fellow man demands it. 



'4t 



CHAPTER IV. 



THE HUMANITARIAN. 



The Samaritan is introduced by Jesus with- 
out explanations. Jesus did not lay bare the 
motives behind his conduct. Much less did 
Jesus tell us anything about the man's theol- 
ogy, or his views concerning the question, 
"Who is my neighbor?" He did show us the 
man's religion in action. The only part of a 
man's religion that is worth knowing is the 
part that gets translated into conduct. "What 
doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say 
he hath faith, and have not works? can faith 
save him?" (James 2: 14.) 

A Southern senator is credited with a story 
about a certain colored man who came under 
the influence of great excitement prevailing 
at a camp meeting, and felt impelled to address 
the audience. 

"Brudders and sisters," he said, "I'se been a 
42 



9 Certain Siamaritan 

bad nigger in my day. I'se stole watermelons, 
and Fse stole chickens, and I'se cussed a heap, 
and I'se carved fellahs wif mah razor; but 
praise be de Lawd, brudders and sisters, I'se 
nebber yet lost mah religion!" 

Now Jesus does not allow such a distinction 
between conduct and religion. With him the 
conduct is religion. *'By their fruits ye shall 
know them." (Matt. 7: 16.) What the Sa- 
maritan did is the proof of his inherent char- 
acter. So, then, contrasted with disgusting 
selfishness, narrowness, and cowardice, there 
emerges this figure of The Humanitarian. 

We might have called Jesus' hero 'The Phil- 
anthropist,'* for the word is singularly appro- 
priate. It means "a lover of man." That is 
what this Samaritan was. But the beautiful 
word "philanthropist" has been abused. There 
has crept into it a sinister suggestion of con- 
descension which is threatening to make the 
word hateful. We do not think of a poor 
man, who merely loves his fellow man, with- 
out being able to build libraries for him, as a 
philanthropist. The word is commonly be- 
stowed only on the man of wealth who, out of 

43 



a Certain Samaritan 

his abundance, reaches down to scatter gifts 
to the poor. We are forced to suspect that 
the philanthropy of some wealthy men is sim- 
ply a fad. There is not as much love of man- 
kind displayed in the exercise as apparent 
desire to demonstrate that the giver can afford 
to be generous. At least the element of 
* 'brotherly love" does not appear in anything 
else but the gift. If the word ''philanthropist" 
is to apply to these men, then being a philan- 
thropist is not so exceedingly praiseworthy. 
Nor would we say that this Samaritan was a 
philanthropist Therefore we will not take 
the risk of the word. The hero was a hu- 
manitarian. A humanitarian is one who feels 
with and for his fellow men. Compassion, fel- 
low suffering, is his crowning characteristic. 
He may be rich or poor, wise or ignorant; if 
his heart goes out in sympathy to his fellows 
he is a humanitarian. 

Jesus exalted his hero for the single virtue 
of being a humanitarian. Some would con- 
sider that a very risky proceeding. There 
were many in Jesus' day who thought a guard- 
ian should be appointed to keep Jesus from in- 
44 



a Certain Samaritan 

dulging in extravagant language and deeds. 
*'He is beside himself," they said. Sometimes 
they explained his conduct even more satisfac- 
torily to themselves: ^'He hath a devil." He 
treated too lightly the serious matters of their 
Sabbath regulations, and their ceremonial 
washings. He was too lenient with sinners — 
even associating with them — and he forgave 
their sins when they were sorry and wept ! He 
permitted an ex-publican to travel around with 
him. A heretic Samaritan he held up as an 
example. 

Do we know enough about this Samaritan to 
justify the bestowal of praise on him? Is it 
not unbecoming haste to make a religious hero 
of a man without further information than is 
offered in this record ? His credentials are not 
filled out. The distinction between the moral- 
ity of ungodly men and that of orthodox men 
must be maintained at all costs. For the dif- 
ference is as great as the distance between the 
termini of the other world. It would have 
been a ludicrous thing to make a hero of a 
man who was condemned to hell. And yet 
the final estate of a mere humanitarian would 

45 



a Certain S)amaritan 

be open to doubt according to all orthodox 
creeds, with many of them leaning toward the 
Jewish conclusion that a Samaritan could not 
go anywhere else but to perdition. *'His hu- 
manitarianism would not save him." The sen- 
tence sounds so much like a quotation we are 
afraid to omit the quotation marks. Doubtless 
we could find the original if we had patience 
to wade through some volumes of homiletics. 

The sort of reasoning that divorces human- 
itarianism from religion, or at least insists that 
the two may be separate, leads to many a para- 
dox. It was Mark Twain, we believe, who 
told the story of a benevolent man, although 
a heretic, who was killed by a highwayman. 
This murdered man, because of his evil theol- 
ogy, immediately entered upon his eternal sen- 
tence in hell. But the murderer, before he was 
hanged, repented and believed; whereupon hei 
was privileged forever to gaze down from the ' 
gates of heaven upon the victim of his crime. 

So, on the basis of these man-made distinc- 
tions, we could not afford to praise chis Sa- 
maritan very highly unless we knew more 
about his theology. Obviously we would be 
46 



a Certain ©amatitait 

pursuing a shocking course in praising an "un- 
saved" man. But our perplexity is increased 
by realizing that Jesus' account of the man 
lacks information on those matters which are 
held to be so vital. If we have to fall back on 
the probabilities of the case, the very fact that 
the man was a Samaritan weighs heavily 
against him. The probabilities are that he 
worshipped on Mount Gerizim, denied the au- 
thority of the Jewish temple and priesthood, 
and accepted a falsified text of the Pentateuch. 
The probabilities favor the theory that this 
Samaritan would be eternally damned. And 
that in spite of his humanitarianism. Any 
Pharisee would concur with us in this, espe- 
cially the one who "passed by on the other 
side." 

It is odd that all these considerations did not 
trouble Jesus. Surely he must have known 
what deductions in future years would be 
drawn from his careless story. Why did he 
not hedge the narrative about with orthodox 
observations ? Should he not have added, con- 
cerning the conduct of these three actors, that 
the priest and the Levite would be saved, in 
47 



a Certain Samaritan 

spite of their unbrotherliness, because their 
"belief" was correct, and the Samaritan would 
be condemned in spite of his humanitarianism ? 
Jesus left such terrible openings for heter- 
odoxy. Because he was so forgetful of guard- 
ing the truth, the Jewish leaders, in final des- 
peration, crucified him. Were they not right? 
Or did Jesus know his business ? His busi- 
ness was religion. He seems to have been 
successful in his business in spite of his cruci- 
fixion. He has done more to draw men to 
God than any other agency this world has ever 
known. We will believe that he knew what 
he was doing. Tolstoy once said that the 
trouble with Christians was that they did not 
believe Jesus meant what he said. The same 
may hold true regarding the significant omis- 
sions of Jesus. He omitted altogether to lay 
down the complicated "plan of salvation" of 
which we hear so much. In his three years 
ministry he used the word "salvation" but 
once (John 4). The plan of salvation as out- 
lined in Luke 15 is significant in its omissions. 
The theology of "The Prodigal Son" can be 
understood by any child. Jesus seemed to 
48 



a Certain %>amatitan 

think it was sufficiently explicit. Nor did the 
dying thief on the cross have time for instruc- 
tion in any creed. 

There would be but one possible question to 
ask regarding this Samaritan ; that is, whether 
this conduct of his on the Jericho road was 
merely an isolated and spasmodic act, or 
whether it was typical of the man. We may 
assume that this specific act was born out of 
the Samaritan's inherent humanitarianism. If 
brotherly love had not been deeply rooted in 
his heart, it would not have found its expres- 
sion at all under such unfavorable circum- 
stances. 

Now if this act was the expression of the 
Samaritan's heart, we need not worry very 
much over his theology or orthodoxy. Theol- 
ogy is of the head, religion of the heart. *'Re- 
ligion unites what theology divides." Give us 
a man with his heart right toward God and 
his fellow man, and his theories will not mat- 
ter much one way or the other. "My *doxy' is 
orthodoxy." But who is right? 

The Samaritan's heart was right toward 
God. Do you ask how we know this ? Because 
49 



a Cettafn ^amantan 

he loved his fellow man ; loved him and served 
him in spite of obstacles, dangers, and com- 
mon prejudices. Perhaps some would prefer 
to put the Samaritan through a severer cate- 
chetical examination before admitting his 
right attitude toward God. This, in spite of 
granting that he had the right attitude toward 
his fellow man. The demand of further proof 
would be caused by a refusal to recognize that 
there is no distinction between the service of 
God and the service of man, so far as religious- 
ness is concerned. The only service we can 
render God is the service of our fellow men. 
Going to church is not rendering service. It 
is paying tribute to the Almighty and seeking 
inspiration and help to do his work. The Sa- 
maritan served God in serving his fellow man. 
That is the only way we can prove our love 
to God. "If a man say, I love God, and hateth 
his brother, he is a liar." (I John, 4: 20.) 

The great heresy is to hold that the priest 
and the Levite loved God and were right in 
their attitude toward God, but merely failed 
in their collateral duty toward man. That is 
to say they were right in one-half of their re- 

50 



a: Certain ^amatftan 

ligion and wrong in the other half. It is hard 
to conceive of a more devilish distinction. 
That sort of doctrine has made it possible for 
rich men to oppress the poor while devoutly 
professing their love to God. It permits such 
to delude themselves with the vain hope that 
in spite of their lack of humanitarianism they 
can squeeze through into the Kingdom of God 
because they accept a scheme of atonement. It 
is a lie ! *'Whoso hath this world's goods, and 
seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up 
his bowels of compassion from him, how 
dwelleth the love of God in him?" (I John 3 : 
17.) The priest and the Levite did not love 
God, if they did not love their fellow men. 
They had no religion at all. "Whosoever 
doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither 
he that loveth not his brother." (I John 3: 
10.) "He that loveth not his brother abideth 
in death." (I John 3: 14.) 

If, on the basis of an obsolescent theology, 
you suppose the status of every man is fixed 
irrevocably and eternally at his death, you will 
at least grant, on the authority of John as 
quoted above, that it is the "religious" priest 
51 



a Certain Samaritan 

and Levite who would be ''fixed" in hell, while 
the heretic Samaritan^ as lover of man and 
hence lover of God, would be the heir of 
Heaven. That conclusion may be disconcert- 
ing. It welcomes scrutiny. Could Christ 
place a man like the Samaritan anywhere but 
on his right hand? He is certainly among 
those to whom Jesus says, "I was an hungred, 
and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye 
gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took 
me in : naked, and ye clothed me : I was sick, 
and ye visited me : — inasmuch as ye have done 
it unto one of the least of these my brethren, 
ye have done it unto me." (Mat. 25: 34 ff.) 
The justification of the Samaritan does not 
rest on theological grounds. We fear theology 
discredits the sufficiency of his act, because 
there was no recognition of the Fall, and no 
acquiescence in the scheme of redemption ex- 
hibited by it. Yet we do not need to worry 
over our hero's status. Jesus endorsed him. 
He had absorbed the message of Micah : "Will 
the Lord be pleased with thousands of rams, 
or with ten thousands of rivers of oil? shall I 
give my firstborn for my transgression, the 



a Certain Samaritan 

fruit of my body for the sin of my soul? He 
hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and 
what doth the Lord require of thee, but to do 
justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly 
with thy God." (Micah. 6:8.) 



53 



CHAPTER V. 

THE HEART OF THE AUTHOR. 

In his story about "A Certain Samaritan/* 
we may believe Jesus had no thought of por- 
traying his own character. 

Those who first heard him speak these words 
in reply to the lawyer's question would have 
no reason for thinking that Jesus was suggest- 
ing himself as the hero of this story. 

If a subsequent review of Jesus' life and 
character reveals to us the striking resem- 
blance of Jesus to the ^'Certain Samaritan," 
we may believe that the self -portrayal of Jesus 
was utterly unconscious. 

Yet we notice that a man indicates his own 
character and temperament by his judgment of 
other men. Whenever a man delivers such a 
judgment naturally and spontaneously, it is 
far more reliable as a self -revelation than any 
deliberate disclosure could be. 
54 



a Certain ^amatitatt 

It is a common device of fiction writers 
deftly to describe a person by placing him in 
situations where he must pass an opinion on 
the character and conduct of others. 

If, for instance, one were desirous of por- 
traying the character of a "John Jones," one 
might say, in a direct way, ''John Jones was a 
man of decisive temper, not swayed by emo- 
tions, but cold-hearted, and narrow in his sym- 
pathies." Such may be a direct description of 
''John Jones"; yet it is not impressive. One 
could not hope to have it retained in memory 
very long. A clearer and more convincing 
"John Jones" is presented by saying nothing 
about him, directly, but by having him brought 
in contact with a "William Smith," and then 
declaring his opinion: "I like that man! 
There's nothing silly or sentimental about him. 
When he says a thing he means it ; and when he 
means a thing he says it. He doesn't let his 
feelings sway him; he knows what he wants 
and what he believes; and he keeps himself 
from getting side-tracked by any one's tears 
or whining." From this expression of opin- 
ion we would really know as much about "John 

55 



a Cettaftt S)amatitan 

Jones" as we would of the man who was de- 
scribed. In the piece of fiction named "The 
Good Samaritan," one gets a clearer concep- 
tion of Jesus than ever of the hero of his story. 
The t3^pe of character one praises indicates 
one's ideals. 

It is claimed, with a good deal of reason, 
that a considerable biography of Shakespeare 
may be written from a study of his characters. 
Knowing only their books, we have little trou- 
ble in discriminating between a Zola and an 
Amos Wells, a Jack London and a Henry Van 
Dyke. 

If a man praise the life of the quiet, stu- 
dious fellow man, we may discover the man's 
temperament and ideal in his judgment. If a 
man's interest is centered on the "captains of 
industry" and the shrewd money-makers, that, 
too, is a self-revelation. The boy who loves 
to read about "Deadwood Dick," and the one 
who turns to "Edison's Inventions," each is 
easily classified. 

Sympathies and antipathies, affinities and 
repulsions, are exact gauges of character and 
temperament. In such a way Jesus shows his 

56 



3i Certain Samaritan 

predilections by his judgments : his prejudices 
are made evident. A character like that of his 
"Samaritan" appealed to Jesus as praiseworthy 
because such conduct was Jesus' own ideal of 
life. The narrative discloses Jesus' throbbing 
soul. There wells up from the depth of his 
heart, like living water, his affection for suf- 
fering mankind. 

The intensity of Jesus' sympathy is made as 
manifest in his story as it was when by the 
tomb of Lazarus the tears burst from his eyes. 
He himself yearned to bring help and comfort 
and healing to the robbed and bruised and for- 
saken, to the bleeding ones left dying on the 
roadside. 

The great passionate heart of Jesus, as re- 
vealed in this story, has thrilled millions of 
other hearts into beating with expanded human 
sympathies. The world has already undergone 
a colossal change, and the beating of the great 
heart is continuing to set kindred hearts vi- 
brating. 

"Did Athens with three-fourths, and Rome 
v^ith three-fifths, of her population in slavery 
build hospitals for the sick, the lame, the blind, 

57 



a Certain %amaritait 

the insane, the leper? Did these humanitarian 
feelings and customs of benevolence arise in 
India, or Japan or China, with their highly 
praised and elaborate system of morals? 
Among pagan nations there has been high cul- 
ture, art, and eloquence, but little humanity. 
Greece and Rome had shrines for numberless 
divinities, forty theatres for amusement, thou- 
sands of perfumery stores, but no shrine for 
brotherly love, no almshouse for the poor. Mil- 
lions of money were expended on convivial 
feasts, but nothing for orphans or homes for 
widov^s. 'In all my classic reading,' says 
Professor Packard, 'I have never met with 
the idea of an infirmary or hospital, except for 
sick cats (sacred animals) in Egypt'" — Sid- 
ney Gulick, 'The Growth of the Kingdom of 
God." 

Dr. Dollinger says, "Among the millionaires 
of Rome there was not one who founded a 
hospice for the poor or a hospital for the sick." 

'The sympathies of the heathen have never 

extended beyond the class, or at widest the 

nation; but those of Christianity are as wide 

as the human race. Christianity alone has es- 

58 



a Certain ^amatftan 

tablished hospitals for an alien race on the sim- 
ple ground of a common human brotherhood." 
—"Life of Peter Parker, M.D." 



Nothing has so greatly affected modern 
thought, in natural sciences, philosophy and 
theology, as the conclusions of Charles Dar- 
win's researches. The idea of "evolution" has 
caused scholars to revise most of our previous 
knowledge. As corollary to the idea of evolu- 
tion is the law of "the survival of the fittest" 
Nature decrees, we are told, that the best 
breeds of animals are to be retained by a pro- 
cess of elimination. The stronger trample out 
the weaker. The blizzard, the drought, the 
pestilence, are nature's handmaidens for as- 
sisting the strong in this task of killing off the 
unfit and the weak. The strong alone are left 
to propagate themselves. 

This law of nature, "red in tooth and claw," 
is unquestioned, we suppose, in its main fea- 
tures. Nor does the pronouncement regard- 
ing "the survival of the fittest" affect us in 
this treatise, so far as its principles have to 
59 



3 Certain Samaritan 

do only with nature. But the theory has been 
transferred to human relationships, and has 
sought justification because it is a law of na- 
ture. The peril of such reasoning by analogy 
should be easily apparent. 

A law of nature is expressed in the proverb : 
"Where there is so much smoke there must be 
some fire." The truth of the assertion, as it 
stands, is undoubted. There could be no smoke 
if there were no fire. But the proverb would 
be without purpose in its primary application, 
as it is self-evident. The only object of it is in 
its inference and insinuation that the law true 
in nature is also true in human affairs. But 
that is not justified; it is not so. Though the 
smoke proves the fire, it does not follow, for 
instance, that persistent evil reports prove the 
existence of something evil. It has been a most 
damnable lie. With what pious unction a 
Pharisee might have applied it to Jesus! 
"Jesus stirs up so much trouble; the leaders 
of our people, our priests and our scribes are 
condemning him so vehemently : there must be 
something in it: if he is not really in league 
with Beelzebub, the Prince of Devils, there 
60 



3 Certain @)amatitan 

must be something else that is not altogether 
right in him; for *where there is so much 
smoke there must be some fire !' " 

Likewise it may be a law of nature that "the 
bird with a broken pinion ne'er soars so high 
again," but it is not true of a man redeemed 
from a life of sin. The grace of God may re- 
verse any natural process. If law abounds, 
grace may abound more. That a certain state of 
affairs, or process of consequences, is the law 
of nature, does not prove that it is also a law 
in any other realm. 

Yet without having been clearly formulated, 
the idea of a "survival of the fittest" had been 
known and accepted long before Darwin pro- 
nounced it as a law of nature. Jesus came in 
daily contact with men who believed the masses 
were simply necessary rubbish in the manufac- 
ture of the few who were fit to survive. It 
was an ancient as well as a modern conception, 
that on the ground beneath the rose-bush must 
fall the multitude of imperfect buds, snipped 
off before their maturity so that sustenance 
might be concentrated for the "beauty" rose. 
Materialist and Pharisee differ only in this one 
6i 



Certain Samaritan 

respect, that the former believes the process of 
elimination is executed by the inexorable hand 
of Fate, while the latter believes that his god 
directly supervises his elevation : for which 
providence he may pray, "I thank thee, O God, 
that I am not as other men." An eloquent in- 
dication of this spirit is noticeable in the dis- 
dain expressed in John 7: 47, regarding the 
worth of the common people who were Jesus' 
followers : "Have any of the rulers or of the 
Pharisees believed on him? But this people 
who knoweth not the law are cursed" 

We have nothing to do, here, with the truth 
or falsity of the theory of the survival of the 
fittest, in nature. But we are intensely con- 
cerned in observing how this theory has been 
adopted by men in their relation to their fel- 
low-men. The cruelties of business conditions 
are defended on the basis of animal necessity. 
As brute animals kill each other for food, so 
must men. The prize is to the foremost— 
the devil take the hindmost. To get above the 
average run of men one must stand on the 
prostrate forms of the nearest competitors. 
Self-preservation is calmly pronounced "the 
62 



3 Certain Samaritan 

first law of nature." But by what authority? 
Certainly not on the authority of God who in 
the person of his Son said: "If any man will 
come after me, let him deny himself, and 
take up his cross, and follow me. For whoso- 
ever will save his life shall lose it: and whoso- 
ever will lost his life for my sake shall find 
it." Matt. i6: 25. 

God does not encourage men in the task of 
eliminating the weak. That is, the true God 
does not. Some men have a made-to-order god. 
He is created by the worshipper, or is manu- 
factured by an obliging clergyman because a 
$300,000 church is needed; but his name is 
spelled with a small g. He is not the god of 
other men, but the private property of one 
man. Naturally he is chiefly concerned for the 
welfare of his own devotee. There are ad- 
vantages in having a god like this. For one 
thing, his owner can curse him, when he is 
angry, without being guilty of blasphemy. But 
he is seldom angry with him, for this god has 
the good judgment not to meddle with the 
process of wringing out human life-blood to 
produce dividends. He is a much more sensi- 

63 



a Certain Siamatitait 

ble, sane, and comforting god than the One 
who is reported as expressing such anarchistic 
sentiments as : ''The Lord will enter into judg- 
ment with the ancients of his people, and the 
princes thereof : for ye have eaten up the vine- 
yard : the spoil of the poor is in your houses. 
What mean ye that ye beat my people to pieces, 
and grind the faces of the poor ? saith the Lord 
God of hosts." (Isaiah 3: 14, 15.) This pri- 
vate, saw-dust god has not the impudence to 
say: ''Behold, the hire of the laborers who 
have reaped down your fields, which is of you 
kept back by fraud, crieth : and the cries of 
ther. which have reaped have entered into the 
ears of the Lord of sabaoth." (James 5:4.) 
No, this god deals in generalities about the 
"inscrutable providence" by which he ordains 
some few men to clip coupons and condemns 
the great many others to mines and looms and 
sweat-shops and steel-mills, for a twelve-hour 
day, with a periodic shift of twenty- four hours 
on end, at a wage of $1.65 per day, for which 
the laborer must throw in, for good measure, 
his body, his mind, and his soul — for he has 
no time to bother with them, and they don't 

64 



a Certain Siamatitan 

create dividends for his employer. This is the 
god who heartily endorses the law of the sur- 
vival of the fittest and the elimination of the 
weak. That makes it all right for 5000 Slavs 
and Huns to rot into the ground to fertilize 
the flowers of industrial achievement. 

How far these cruel and heartless concep- 
tions are removed from the spirit of ''The 
Good Samaritan!" By the ministrations of 
the Humanitarian we have exemplified the law 
of mercy to the weak, the fallen, the ones 
robbed and bruised. 

God is not as much interested in successful 
lives as we are. That is, successful according 
to our standards of success. An illustration of 
this is offered in the catalogue of God's heroes, 
given in the eleventh chapter of Hebrews. Nat- 
urally in that roll-call of illustrious men we 
find the names of Abraham, Moses, Gideon, 
David and Samuel — the successful and worthy 
pioneers, generals, statesmen, reformers, and 
kings of Israel. But the striking thing in this 
enumeration is the recognition given the weak 
and the defeated and the failures, whose very 
names had been forgotten. ''Others had trials 

65 



a certain ^amatitan 

of cruel mockings and scourgings, yea, more- 
over of bonds and imprisonment: they were 
stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, 
were slain with the sword; they wandered 
about in sheepskins and goatskins ; being desti- 
tute, afflicted, tormented." Of these apparent 
failures in life, it is said, in the next verse: 
"Of whom the world was not worthy." (He- 
brews II : 38.) 

In recent literature we have not seen any- 
thing which expresses so forcibly the praise of 
the strong and the disdain for the weak, as cer- 
tain lines from 'The Law of the Yukon." 

*This is the law of the Yukon, and ever she 

makes it plain : 
'Send not your weak and your feeble, send 

me your strong and your sane. 
Swift as the panther in triumph, fierce as 

the bear in defeat. 
Sired of a bull-dog parent, steeled in the 

furnace heat ; 
Send me the best of your breeding, send me 

your chosen ones ; 
Them will I take to my bosom, them will I 

call my sons : 

,66 



a Certain giamatitan 

Them will I gild with my treasures, them 
will I g-lut with my meat ; 

But the others — the misfits, the failures — -I 
trample them under my feet. 

Dissolute, damned and despairful ; crippled, 
and palsied, and slain; 

You would send me the spawn of your gut- 
ters — go take back your spawn again !' " 

That is the exaltation of the strong. As for 
the unfit, the weak, they are to be trampled 
under feet, to be thrown back, to be left to 
damnation. 

By the mountainside, facing the multitude 
of "crippled and palsied and slain," once there 
stood One who called to ''the misfits, the 
failures" : 

"Come unto me, all ye who labor and are 
heavy laden, and I will give you rest." 

That One was the author of this "Good 
Samaritan" story, and his sympathy for the 
fallen and bruised is always the same. 



67 



CHAPTER VI. 

THE GROUND OF JUDGMENT. 

**He shall have judgment without mercy, 
that hath shewed no mercy."— James 2:13. 

There are four major characters in our 
story: The Samaritan, the priest, the Levite, 
and the wounded traveller. The minor charac- 
ters are the robbers and the inn-keeper. It will 
not be necessary to dwell on these lesser per- 
sonages. But of the more important charac- 
ters, we have as yet devoted no special atten- 
tion to the traveller. Perhaps, at first thought, 
it might seem that we place him in the wrong 
classification ; that really he belongs among the 
minor characters. It is true that his part in a 
dramatization of the story might be taken by 
one without the least histrionic ability — for 
the traveller has not a word to say. His part is 
altogether a passive one. Yet we shall see 
68 



a Certain ^amatitan 

that he must be considered a major character. 

Into a certain new church building there 
were recently set four stained-glass windows. 
One represented "Christ the Good Shepherd," 
another "Christ Knocking at the Door," an- 
other "Christ in the Attitude of Blessing," and 
the fourth represented "The Good Samaritan" 
walking by the side of the beast which was 
carrying the wounded traveller to the inn. 

People of the community came to see these 
art windows. More than one admiring spec- 
tator remarked on the fact that three of the 
windows portrayed Christ in some attitude. 
None seemed to realize that there were two 
representations of Christ in "The Good Samar- 
itan" window. Was not Christ in the Good 
Samaritan? That is readily granted, we sup- 
pose; either from the standpoint that Christ 
himself was the good Samaritan, or that the 
spirit of Jesus found itself incarnated in the 
person of this Samaritan. In either case it is 
Christ who is represented. But it is even more 
important, because usually less emphasized, 
that we recognize Christ in the wounded trav- 
eller. Moreover, the Christ in a needy fellow 

69 



g Certain ^amatitan 

man is the only Christ we will ever have op- 
portunity to serve. 

The great judgment scene depicted by Jesus 
is reported in the twenty-fifth chapter of Mat- 
thew's Gospel. The first striking truth in the 
narrative is the sincere willingness of the con- 
demned as well as the blessed to serve Jesus. 
There is every indication of honesty in the sur- 
prised reply of the condemned ones, after they 
heard the indictment against them. They cried : 
"Lord, when saw we Thee an hungred, or 
athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in 
prison, and did not minister unto Thee?" 
These condemned ones were not such as would 
have refused help to Christ. Yet the ground 
of judgment is clearly and unmistakably 
pointed out. It was the conduct toward Christ 
as he is identified with, or is incarnated in, the 
lowliest fellow-man. The only Christ they 
came in contact with, the only Christ they had 
opportunity to serve, was the Christ in a fel- 
low-man who was hungry, or athirst, or a 
stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison. As 
they refused to serve their fellow-men, they 
omitted the only possible service to Christ. 
70 



a Certain Samaritan 

This declaration of the ground of judgment 
cannot be evaded. Christ does not merely ex- 
tend a general protectorate over mankind in 
need. He does not simply ask for char- 
itable consideration of those in want, as 
a favor to himself. His pronouncement 
is far more personal and intimate. Jesus 
insists that there is a living incarnation of him- 
self in all men. Christ's atonement was once 
made when, ''though he was rich, yet for our 
sake he became poor," humiliating himself by 
becoming incarnate in a human body, and so 
making "at one" God and man, in his own 
person. This was God's identifying of him- 
self with man. But this redemptive work of 
Jesus has become enlarged by a complete dif- 
fusion of his incarnation. God was identified 
with man by the wedlock of his Son with the 
human body born of Mary. Now God is iden- 
tified with all men by the particular incarnation 
of Christ in every man. A disregard, or un- 
belief, of this multiplied incarnation of God, 
this identity of God with every man, is the 
ground of condemnation. "Inasmuch as ye 
did it not to the least of these my brethren, ye 

71 



a Certain Samaritan 

did it not to Me. For / was an hungred, 
and ye gave Me no meat; I was thirsty, and 
ye gave Me no drink : / was a stranger, and ye 
took Me not in : naked, and ye clothed Me not : 
sick, and in prison, and ye visited Me not." It 
is a tremendous conception. No more revolu- 
tionary social teaching has ever come to men 
than this idea of having to deal w^ith Christ 
wherever we deal with our fellow-men. The 
universal acceptance of this doctrine of Jesus 
would immediately bring in the kingdom of 
God on earth. 

The intimate relationship existing between 
this declaration of the ground of judgment 
and the story of "A Certain Samaritan" is not 
difficult to establish. There is a consistency of 
viewpoint which not only proves the common 
source of both narratives, but also greatly 
strengthens the force of each. 

Instantly we notice the emphasis placed on 
humanitarianism as the distinguishing charac- 
teristic both of the Samaritan and of the 
blessed in the judgment. The condemnation 
of the Priest and Levite, like that of those on 
the left hand of the Judge, is because of the 
72 



a Certain Samaritan 

lack of brotherly love. And that is the only 
ground of judgment in either case. 

Now, it may be that our former statement 
regarding humanitarianism as the exclusive 
reason for the approbation of the Samaritan, 
vv^as not convincing. It may be that there v^as 
a doubt left lurking in the minds of some as 
to vi^hether the principle we deduced was not 
too wide to be taken from the premise of one 
story of Jesus. It may have been thought that 
the instance of '*A Certain Samaritan" was an 
isolated one, and that other explanations might 
overcome the strength of the argument. But 
we feel that such a doubt is now totally dis- 
pelled, as we have brought to us this delib- y 
erately portrayed word-picture of the judg- 
ment, in which again the sole and exclusive 
basis of condemnation or commendation is the 
withholding or exercising of the humanitarian - 
conduct. 

The single requirement demanded in the 
judgment scene is that of brotherly love. 
Again we say this may be disconcerting, but 
the statement welcomes scrutiny. A man 
whose religious life was first cradled in a 
73 



a Certain Samaritan 

creed, and whose spiritual milk has ever since 
been strained through the form of a certain 
logic concerning the plan of salvation, would 
likely conceive of a very different judgment 
scene from that portrayed by Jesus. Such a 
one would suppose that different questions 
would be asked, and other demands be made, 
"when the Son of man shall come in his glory, 
and all the holy angels with him — and before 
him shall be gathered all nations." Such a 
one would expect questions regarding belief, 
intellectual convictions, the assenting to prop- 
ositions in regard to the scheme of salvation 
and the plan of redemption. 

He who has been nurtured on a "scheme'* 
of Christianity, and has been persuaded that 
the assenting to, and acceptance of, a definite 
sort of proposition is the substance of the 
Christian religion is doubtless shocked at the 
revelation that Jesus welcomes into glory those 
who were merely humanitarian — and that 
without even knowing that they were serving 
Christ in their humanitarianism ! For those 
on the right hand had not realized that Christ 
was in their fellow-men. They could hardly 
74 



a Certain ©amaritan 

believe their good fortune. "When saw we 
Thee an hungred, and fed Thee? or thirsty, 
and gave Thee drink? When saw we Thee 
a stranger, and took Thee in? or naked, and 
clothed Thee? Or when saw we Thee sick, 
or in prison, and came unto Thee?'' they 
asked. It was the unconscious service of 
Christ, in the service of fellow-men, which was 
approved. Since Christ has made this revela- 
tion of the ground of final judgment, it is 
not possible that Christian people will continue 
to ask this question. But the basis of God's 
favor or disfavor is only set forth the clearer 
by Jesus' teaching that even the service of 
fellow-men, which was not knowingly done to 
Christ, was acceptable, and gained the position 
on his right hand. How much more must they 
be worthy of condemnation who slight their 
fellow-men after being told explicitly that 
Christ is incarnated in them ! 

Neither "correctness" of belief nor moral 
uprightness other than brotherly love, appears 
to have anything to do with the judgment. A 
man might have had perfect knowledge of 
the revealed will of God, and have given his 
75 



a €ttteiin Samaritan 

assent to the plan of God, and have accepted 
it heartily, and yet find himself on the con- 
demned side in the judgment. We acknowl- 
edged the probable ''correctness" of the priest's 
and Levite's theology. But Christ makes hu- 
manitarianism the one deciding issue. On that 
ground they are condemned. We are even 
ready to allow that the priest and the Levite 
may have been perfect in obedience to the Ten 
Commandments; yet without in the least 
changing their status at the judgment. "Mercy 
to those in need" is the only test propounded 
by Jesus. Was he guarding the truth care- 
fully? Surely he must have known what 
deductions in future years would be drawn 
from his narrative. Should he not have 
given a different conception of the test by 
which would be separated the "saved" from 
the "unsaved ?" Jesus would never have made 
a successful evangelist. A successful evan- 
gelist gets men to accept God's plan of sal- 
vation and be saved. Jesus persuades men to 
love their fellow-men and treat every man as 
a Christ. Do we believe Jesus meant what he 
said? Or do we believe he omitted essential 

76 



a Certain Samaritan 

things? Are we afraid that what Jesus said, 
and refused to say, is a peril to religion ? The 
Jewish leaders believed that, and therefore cru- 
cified him. It was the natural thing to do, and 
has been done a great deal since then. Yet 
truly one Christian can hardly resent it when 
another Christian desires to base his religion 
on Jesus rather on Jesus' self-appointed inter- 
preters, whether these be prophets, or apostles, 
or popes, or bishops, or councils, or assemblies. 
Nor can an appeal to the authority of Jesus be 
considered prejudicial to the right influence of 
Christianity. 

So far as Jesus is permitted to speak for 
himself, he holds that neither "correctness" 
of belief nor mere obedience to the Ten Com- 
mandments is the essential matter in the 
final determining of a man's condition. "Not 
every one that saith unto me, 'Lord, Lord,' 
shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but 
he that doeth the will of my Father which is 
in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, 
'Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy 
name? and in thy name have cast out devils? 
and in thy name done many wonderful works ?' 
77 



a Certain §)amaritan 

And then will I profess unto them, 'I never 
knew you: depart from me, ye that work in- 
iquity.' " — Jesus as quoted in Mat. 7: 21, 22, 
23. That should dispose of the question re- 
garding the sufficiency of correct belief. 

In the other matter of the moral upright- 
ness which omits the supreme requirement of 
humanitarianism, and its utter inadequacy for 
meeting the demands of God, we have still 
clearer evidence. Take, for example, the story 
of the young man who came to Jesus and asked 
him ''What good thing shall I do, that I may 
have eternal life?" (Matt. 19: 16). A mod- 
ern evangelist would probably have given an 
answer which has to do with a correct belief 
and a consent in God's plan. The ancient 
legalist would doubtless have emphasized the 
obedience to the Decalogue as the prime re- 
quirement. Jesus makes humanitarianism the 
essential factor. "Go and sell all that thou 
hast, and give to the poor." He apparently ad- 
mitted, at least, for argument's sake, that the 
young man's claim of having perfectly kept 
the Ten Commandments was true. It did not 
matter. What did matter was whether the 

78 



g Certain ^amatitan 

young man had deep love for his fellow-men. 
That could be tested. The test proved he did 
not have the heart of a humanitarian. For 
that reason everything else was useless. 

The story which Jesus told about Dives and 
Lazarus has its only sensible interpretation 
along the lines of this same ground of judg- 
ment. Why was the rich man condemned? 
Certainly not because of his riches. Abraham 
was an immensely rich man, yet the reclining 
in Abraham's bosom is made the figure of 
blessedness in this very parable. Jesus never 
denounced rich men because of their riches. 
Nor was Dives condemned for being immoral 
in conduct, or wrong in belief. (Luke i6: 
19-31.) Jesus' words by no means justify the 
inference that this rich man was a gross sin- 
ner, or an infidel. There was but one ground 
of condemnation set forth. That was the lack 
of brotherly love, humanitarianism. He saw 
Lazarus at his gate and in want, and he did 
nothing for him. For that reason he was com- 
mitted to the place of suffering. 

The story of "A Certain Samaritan," with 
its ground of judgment fortified by Jesus' por- 
79 



a Certain Samaritan 

trayal of the last judgment, together with the 
incident of The Rich Young Ruler, and the 
story of Dives and Lazarus, leads us inevita- 
bly to Jesus' point of view. It does not matter 
so much whether you are a Jew or a Samar- 
itan, as that you minister to the wounded trav- 
eller; it does not matter so much whether you 
sing psalms or hymns, as that you treat a 
tramp with wisdom and kindness ; it is not so 
serious a matter whether you sprinkle or im- 
merse in baptism, as it is that you feed the 
hungry, clothe the naked, visit the afflicted; 
nor whether you hold to the Calvinistic or the 
Arminian theology, so much as that you treat 
Jesus with consideration — the Jesus who is in 
even a "regrettable Hun." 

This insistent intrusion of himself, every- 
where we meet our fellow-men, makes Jesus 
an unavoidable presence in our social life. We 
cannot go anywhere without running into 
Jesus. It changes entirely the religion which 
was confined to one day, Sunday. It is no 
longer possible for us to make a subtle dis- 
tinction between meeting God in a worthy way 
on the Lord's day and then meeting merely 
80 



a Certain Samaritan 

other men in the remaining six days of the 
week. This insistent intrusion of the unavoid- 
able Christ will be resented by the man who 
wants to serve God on Sunday and exploit his 
fellow-men during the week days. ''Whither 
shall I flee from Thy presence?" may be a 
cry of despair, but its answer is simply, ''No- 
where !" You meet Christ in the breaking of 
bread at the Communion Table, but none the 
less you meet him again in the person of the 
lowliest son of toil you come in contact with 
on the next day. You meet him in the mines 
and in the sweat-shops and in the railroad 
gangs. As you act toward the least of these, 
you act toward Jesus. Can you pray devoutly 
to him on Sunday, and swear at him on Mon- 
day ; offer him of your abundance in the sanc- 
tuary to-day, and to-morrow maltreat and 
gouge the very life-blood from him? Is it not 
the same person you are dealing with ? "As ye 
have done it unto the least of these my breth- 
ren, ye have done it unto Me. I was an hun- 
gred." 

It is this attitude of Jesus in identifying 
himself with all men which is the most power- 
8i 



9 Certain ©amarftan 

f ul social inspiration the world has ever known 
or ever will know. By a recognition of it the 
face of every man you meet is changed. As 
you treat your fellow-men, you treat Christ. 
Now, when you are about to betray a man, 
recall that you are about to betray Jesus Christ. 
Are we about to do a man a secret wrong, to 
knife him in the dark ? Very well, but we are 
doing it to Jesus Christ ! The judgment words 
beginning with "Inasmuch" must ring in our 
ears forever. The words are recalled when- 
ever there is temptation to cheat, defraud, lie, 
take any advantage of, or refuse any help in 
our power, to a brother-man. When fully 
accepted by us, this teaching of the incarnation 
of Jesus in our fellow-men becomes the most 
potent influence for a changed social order. 
We realize that the most momentous words of 
judgment which could be uttered against us 
would be these of Jesus, "I was in need, and 
you snubbed me." And hereafter none can 
say, "When saw we Thee in need ?" 

Important in the highest degree is it to note 
that Jesus' great test hinges on a sin of omis- 
sion. Few seem to see this point. The priest 
82 



g Certain Samaritan 

and the Levite were not the robbers. But that 
did not exonerate them. Those on the left side 
in judgment are not accused of having done 
any positive wrong to their fellow-men. Yet 
they stand in condemnation. Neither had the 
Rich Young Ruler, nor Dives, committed a 
crim.e against any one. All had "merely" 
failed in humanitarianism. "Merely," you ob- 
serve ; but that was everything. 

Many of us have become nauseated by a 
claim of "holiness" put forth by men who, 
even if we accept them at their own estimate, 
have simply succeeded in avoiding transgres- 
sions of the positive commandments. It is a 
miserable perversion of the ethical teachings of 
Jesus to hold that a man who does no evil is 
holy, sinless. Sin does not consist merely in 
the act of transgression : it is also incurred by 
any failure to perform a good deed. "To him 
that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to 
him it is sin." To achieve "holiness" a man 
would not merely have to be blameless of any 
overt wrongful act, but would have need to 
perform every righteous and merciful act 
which was possible to him. 

83 



a Certain giamatitan 

Too many people have permitted themselves 
to be betrayed with the idea that to be nothing 
is to be ''good." This type of Christianity has 
exalted the colorless character. Men have been 
credited with patience when the cause was lazi- 
ness; with resignation to the will of God when 
it was a hook-worm. ''Oh, to be nothing, 
nothing," some sing; and that they are. But 
being nothing is not being as God wonld have 
us. The man whom God must despise is the 
man so negative that neither big virtues nor 
big vices are possible to him. Many a man 
who has wallowed in the gutters is still closer 
to the heart of God than the immaculate Phar- 
isee whose sense of self-interest preserved him 
from squandering his possessions and making 
a fool of himself. We all have read of the 
response to Jesus' call given by publicans and 
harlots, and by the self-righteous : they all 
went wild over Jesus; the former went wild 
with love, banqueting him, and weeping at 
his feet, and annointing him, and trying to 
make him King ; the latter went wild with hate, 
and drove nails through him. Which had been 
closer to the heart of God? 

84 



a Certain §)amatitan 

It is no one less than Jesus himself who is 
lying on the roadside. If we pass by, we let 
Christ suffer. Christ's sufferings continue: 
his crucifixion still is going on : ''Inasmuch 
as ye did it unto the least of these." No sophis- 
try can break the force of this teaching of 
Jesus. The only way out is by a tacit as- 
sumption that Jesus was either ignorant or 
unreliable. Christ is in our fellow-men, 
whether they be respectable or unrespectable, 
w^hether their need is caused by their own 
faults or by circumstances beyond their con- 
trol. 

Have we justification in withdrawing our 
sympathies from a man because his troubles 
were caused by his own indiscretions or sins? 
Were it not impossible, in the final analysis, to 
find a single object for our sympathy which 
was not caused, directly or indirectly, by a lack 
of discretion, a want of absolute righteousness ? 
It is always some form of sin that has caused 
misery. But Jesus did not withhold help from 
the man at the pool of Siloam because his 
condition was caused by sin, did he? He 
healed him and said : ''Behold, thou art made 
8s 



a Certain Samaritan 

whole: sin no more, lest a worse thing come 
unto thee." (John 5: 14.) And how about 
the vast multitude of sinners to whom Jesus 
was gracious, was not their plight due to their 
own wickedness? Certainly it was; nor did 
Jesus think of denying their sinfulness. It 
may be that the method of showing our love 
must, at times, be conditioned by our desire 
for the ultimate reformation of the needy 
one; but to disdain, refuse help, deny sympa- 
thy because the misery was self -caused is un- 
Christ-like, and furthermore makes practically 
all humanitarianism impossible. It would 
sanction the passing by on the other side until 
the wounded traveller produced his certificate 
that he had been sober, and careful, and was 
of general good moral character. We may 
be perfectly sure that primarily the Samari- 
tan cared for none of those things. He saw that 
the man needed help, and this was enough. 
That is also the explanation of Jesus' conduct 
toward publicans and harlots. He honored 
the divinity in them, that is, the divine na- 
ture in the human body. 

These five matters, then, have engaged our 
86 



a Certain @)amatftan 

attention concerning the Ground of Judgment : 
I. Christ is in all our fellow-men. 2. The 
service of man is the only service of God. 3. 
All other perfection amounts to nothing with- 
out humanitarianism. 4. The betterment of 
social life is dependent on the acceptance of 
this ground of judgment. 5. Christ's condem- 
nation of those on his left side was not for' 
the evil they had done, but for the good they 
had failed to do. 



87 



CHAPTER VIL 



DO THOU LIKEWISE. 



''The only solution of our political and so- 
cial problems lies in cultivating everywhere the 
spirit of brotherhood, of fellow-feeling and 
understanding between man and man, and the 
willingness to treat a man as a man, which are 
the essential factors in American democracy.'' 
— Theodore Roosevelt, in ''The Strenuous 
Life." . 

There was nothing vague or indefinite about 
Jesus' conclusion to his Samaritan story. He 
did not end in an academic generality. With 
the crack of a hammer he smashed the hol- 
low shell of pretence. The lawyer was com- 
manded to emulate the example of the Samari- 
tan. This was the will of God. If it was 
obeyed, it drove the Scribe from the compla- 
88 



a Certain Samaritan 

cency of self-satisfied righteousness, and the 
sufficiency of his temple religion, out into the 
highways of human misery to practice the true 
religion by merciful acts. In that case he was 
converted. He became a "saved" man. He 
would acquiesce in the sentiment expressed by 
Peter, who had been converted from being a 
bigoted Jew into a Christian, and said : ''Of a 
truth I perceive that God is no respecter of 
persons : but in every nation he that f eareth 
him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted 
with him." (Acts lo: 34, 35.) What a conver- 
sion! The greatest miracles Jesus wrought 
were not those in the natural world, but in the 
characters of men. Nothing short of a miracle 
can explain the transformation of Peter into 
a man who could utter the above truth. We 
need to have a great many more miracles per- 
formed among professedly Christian people. 

The greatest service which can be rendered 
by the repeated dramatizations of this Samari- 
tan story, as in lodge-rooms, is to produce 
this kind of a conversion. The truth of 
humanitarianism should hit hard, just as 
Jesus concluded his story with tremendous 

89 



a Certain S)amaritan 

force. The lessons of the drama must have 
reflex influence upon the onlookers. 

We heard somewhere of a man in a 
little village who was noted for his stinginess. 
He owned many houses, held large blocks of 
the stock of local banks, was interested in all 
the little factories of the place, and drew rev- 
enue from half a dozen other sources. But 
when any attempt was made to raise money 
for charitable or church matters, though poorer 
men might contribute from ten to fifty dollars, 
this man's giving was always limited to three 
dollars. One day this man was attending 
prayer-meeting, and while a deacon in the rear 
of the room was offering supplications a piece 
of plaster fell from the ceiling and hit the 
miser on the head. Forgetting where he was 
or what was going on, the man, as he recov- 
ered from his shock, sprang to his feet and 
cried: ''This church should be repaired im- 
mediately. It is in a dangerous condition. 
Such a state of affairs is shameful. I move 
that we have the plastering attended to right 
away, and I subscribe three dollars toward 
it!" After he had sat down again, the Deacon 
90 



a Certain ^amatitan 

continued his interrupted prayer : ''Oh, Lord !" 
he said, ''hit him again!" The frequent repe- 
tition of Jesus' Samaritan story should "hit" 
hard enough to make the conversions the 
world so greatly needs. 

In emphasizing the essential nature of hu- 
manitarianism, in religion, we have necessarily 
detracted from the importance of the church, 
including such matters as the attendance at 
church, church membership, and church the- 
ories. Nor do we regret this. Should it re- 
sult in some realizing that church attendance 
and church conformity have in themselves noth- 
ing to do with man's well-being when "all the 
nations" are gathered in judgment, it would be 
of great profit. To suppose one has religion, 
when he has none, is the most frightful mis- 
take imaginable. Having no religion, and 
knowing it, is a far better situation. There is 
at least reasonable ground for hope. The 
hopelessness of wilful spiritual blindness rests 
in its very nature of being unable to distinguish 
the expressions of God's face. The one who 
has built his religious structure on conform- 
ity to church service and church observance 
91 



3 Cettain Samaritan 

and church support and church attendance will 
hear the howling of the approaching storm 
before he is half through reading the judgment 
scene, and his house will fall, ''and great will 
be the fall thereof" when he finds, in the ver- 
dict, that all the things on which he had laid 
stress have not one whit to do with the disposal 
of men on the final day. The kind of "faith" 
this discovery will wreck had better be wrecked 
as soon as possible. There may be at least 
some chance of rebuilding. 

On what Christian authority do we con- 
sider our meetings on Sunday at eleven a.m. 
and eight p.m. in the light of "divine serv- 
ice ?" It is a misnomer to announce the church 
meeting as a "service." We would not wish 
to quarrel with the use of a word were not 
the idea behind it, in this case, pregnant with 
so fundamental an error as entirely to misin- 
terpret the religious spirit of Jesus. One can 
find absolutely no justification for supposing 
the meetings of Christian people to be for the 
service of God. What kind of service would 
it be? Wherein does it serve the Almighty? 
Does singing about the Christ who girded him- 
92 



3 Certain ^amatftan 

self with a towel and dropped on his knees 
to wash the disciples' feet constitute the imita- 
tion of him? It was this kind of temple serv- 
ice that was disgusting to God even in Israel 
of old. That was, of course, when the chief 
emphasis of religion was in the way of out- 
ward conformity, church regularity, Sabbath 
keeping. That sort of religion is the prolific 
mother of hypocrites and scoundrels. It was 
true of Israel, and it is true to-day. It is loath- 
some of the Almighty. "To what purpose is the 
multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the 
Lord: I am full of the burnt offerings of 
rams, and the fat of fed beasts ; and I delight 
not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or 
of he-goats. When ye come to appear before 
me, who hath required this at your hand, to 
tread my courts? Bring no more vain obla- 
tions ; incense is an abomination unto me ; the 
new moons and Sabbaths, the calling of assem- 
blies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity, even 
the solemn meeting. Your new moons and your 
appointed feasts my soul hateth : they are a 
trouble unto me; I am weary to bear them. 
And when ye spread forth your hands, I will 

93 



a Certain Samaritan 

hide mine eyes from you : yea, when ye make 
many prayers, I will not hear." (Isaiah i : 1 1- 

I5-) 

Instead of advertising divine services for 
Sunday morning at eleven, we should have 
them announced for the time when they really 
begin, viz., Monday morning at seven or nine 
o'clock, according to whether we serve God in 
a factory or in a bank. Divine service contin- 
ues throughout the week, and then on Sunday 
we have the usual task of divine service, but 
also the exalted privilege of worshiping God 
and receiving instruction and inspiration for 
further service. That meeting on Sunday is 
not for doing a favor to God : it is for enjoy- 
ing God's favor. The only service of God in 
which we can engage is the service of man. 
Marching in dress-parade to hear the war 
bulletins and to have our patriotism stimulated 
is not fighting our country's battles. It is 
merely a preparation. In itself it amounts to 
nothing. 

Yet there can be no question of the abso- 
lute necessity for the church meeting. The 
existence of the organized church is due to the 
$4 



a Certain ©amatitan 

commandment of God, and its need is rooted 
in humdin nature. The facts of the gospel 
justify the apostolic injunction, ''Not forsak- 
ing the assembling of yourselves together as 
the manner of some is." (Heb. lo: 25.) 
There is no sanction given in the Bible for 
any notion of worshiping God alone in the 
woods, "his first temples," or anywhere else 
than with our fellow-men. The Lord's Sup- 
per was to be celebrated in a social gathering, 
not by individuals separately. Jesus appeared 
to his disciples, after his resurrection, when 
they were having a meeting in the upper room. 
The Apostle Thomas was heading right along 
the road to agnosticism, because he missed 
church meeting. That is the usual trail for 
those who neglect church meetings. The infidel 
notions of Thomas were straightened out the 
next time he went to the meeting of the disci- 
ples. (John 20: 26-28.) It is the very dis- 
tinct object of God to have men worship in 
groups and not in isolation. There is deep 
reason for you and your neighbors to see one 
another at the Lord's Table and to have you 
hear each other proclaim Jesus your common 
95 



3 Certain Samaritan 

Lord and Master, and call God *'Our" Father 
— not my Father. You are "brothers" at that 
Table no matter what social and economic dif- 
ferences lie between you. You are brothers 
everywhere and under all conditions, but at 
that Table you are forced to acknowledge it. 
This has meant much to the world in breaking 
down barriers. 

It can hardly be needful that one write of 
the inspirational value of the church meet- 
ings. Nor that it is befitting for man publicly 
to acknowledge, by social worship, the claims 
of God on his time and devotion. Thanksgiv- 
ing and praise, voiced by the community, are 
due our Creator and Preserver. The instruc- 
tion regarding the teaching of Jesus is abso- 
lutely necessary; and to gain information we 
need the human teacher as well as the divine 
one. And moreover, and most conclusively, 
the facts of history, as well as our experience, 
testify eloquently and convincingly that the 
progress of true religion, humanitarian reli- 
gion, has been altogether dependent on the ex- 
istence and vitality of the church. Without the 
inspiration gained by social worship, Chris- 

96 



a Certain §)amatitan 

tianity would soon be without living witnesses. 

One's attitude toward the church, or organ- 
ized Christianity in some form, cannot be a 
matter of indifference. Any one can denounce 
the church for her shortcomings. But mere 
destructive activity accomplishes nothing. It is 
easy to be an iconoclast. However, the vari- 
ous human organizations, of all denomina- 
tions, holding the essential truths of Christian- 
ity, do practically all the work that is being 
done for the kingdom of God on earth. 

It has been said that the great modern re- 
form movements — the great social revivals of 
religion — have been born apart from the church 
and have been advanced by organizations un- 
affiliated with the church. There is an appear- 
ance of truth in this statement which makes 
it the more needful to correct a false impres- 
sion. Though the great reform movements 
of to-day are not managed by the church, as 
such, they have all received their inspiration 
and their leadership from the church. That 
is, the influence of Christian ideals, as pre- 
served and set forth by the church, has caused 
the inspiration for whatever progressive spirit 
97 



3 Cettafn Samaritan 

our age possesses. To church organizations 
is due whatever knowledge of Jesus we have 
inherited. To arraign one's self against the 
church, because of her deficiencies, is to with- 
hold support from the only institution which 
has given us ^light and truth," even though 
the very abundance of light she has shed 
through her windows has shown the need of 
cleansing these windows. The stronger the 
sunlight which streams through the window, 
the clearer becomes the evidence of any dust 
on the window-pane. When the church was 
letting in but little light, she received but little 
criticism. The magnificence of her revival 
makes possible the perception of her imper- 
fections. Yet we must thank the church for 
all our knowledge. Since Christianity cannot 
be separated from the organization of the 
church, it follows that we have to give credit 
to the church for whatever humanitarian spirit 
there is in the world. No matter how many 
times Jesus had spoken about humanitarianism, 
we would not have known about it except for 
the church. 

That humanitarianism, in itself, is sufficient 

98 



a Certain ©amatftan 

for salvation without any reference to church 
or theology is the teaching of Jesus. But it 
must be apparent that humanitarianism has 
never flourished apart from Christianity. Nor 
has Christianity flourished apart from the 
church. The entire absence of humanitarian 
institutions of any kind is a phenomenon to 
bear in mind concerning the periods of high- 
est culture and refinement in ancient Rome and 
Athens. Humanitarianism, apart from Chris- 
tianity, is practically unknown. The heathen 
world to-day is filled with cruelty and inhu- 
manity. 

China fifteen hundred years ago was as civ- 
ilized as she is to-day, except where Chris- 
tianity has touched her borders. Northern 
Europe fifteen hundred years ago was a wilder- 
ness, and the Island of Britain totally uncivil- 
ized. What explains the difference to-day? 
Only this, that China has been looking into 
the face of Confucius, and Europe into the 
face of Jesus. China sells her blind girls for 
the trade of shame. The deaf are isolated. 
There are no hospitals. The sick die in their 
agony without relief. What is true of China 
99 



a Certain Samaritan 

is true of all heathen countries. Christianity 
offers the only incentive that has ever quick- 
ened the affection and pity and mercy of man 
in relation to his fellow-man. And this is the 
chief mission of Christianity and constitutes 
its fulfillment. 

If we must have "conditions of salvation," 
humanitarianism embraces them all sufficiently 
to "save" our souls ; and without humanitarian- 
ism all the religion in all the creeds of Chris- 
tendom is not enough to save us from receiving 
Christ^s condemnation. 

Teaching that "mere humanitarianism" is 
sufficient for the saving of one's soul may have 
the sound of heresy. Of course, it would be 
the same kind of heresy that Jesus was guilty 
of in the judgment portrayal, and in the Sa- 
maritan story, and in the Dives and Lazarus 
story, and in many other utterances. But 
really there is not much sense in a criticism 
that this is "substituting humanitarianism for 
personal faith in Jesus." Humanitarianism is 
personal faith in Jesus; and of the only kind 
that pleases Jesus. The acceptance of the his- 
torical facts of Jesus' life and a belief in them 

100 



a Certain giamatttan 

do not constitute any religion. "The devils 
also believe and tremble." (James 2: 19.) 
''Many will say to me in that day, 'Lord, Lord, 
have we not prophesied in thy name ?' — I will 
profess unto them, 'I never knew you.' " 
(Matt. 7:21.) Faith without humanitarian- 
ism is dead. 

We are sometimes deceived into speaking 
of the morality of "unsaved men," and the 
"mere humanitarianism" of the ungodly. Such 
distinctions are shallow. There has been little 
humanitarianism apart from faith in the per- 
son and work of Jesus. Such faith may at 
times have been exercised unconsciously. Such 
was the case with those on the right hand of 
Jesus in the judgment scene. Of the exist- 
ence of the faith, the fruits were the proof. 
There has been a great deal of humanitarian- 
ism apart from an acceptance of any orthodox 
or evangelical "scheme" of salvation — but that 
is another thing. To get at the heart of the 
matter, however, it must be recognized that 
there is no reason for the exercise of brotherly 
love except for its religious value. Why 
should a man have humanitarian desires? 

lOI 



a Certain g)amatitan 

What does it pay him ? What end does it serve ? 
It is senseless and without appeal except on the 
basis that God is immanent in man, and that 
God cares about men. We do not know that 
God is in men except as Jesus told us. Yet the 
fact that Jesus said this would not matter, and 
would not be reliable unless Jesus was what he 
claimed to be as to his person and authority. 
So, you see, there is necessarily a great deal of 
theology involved in a single disinterested act 
of brotherly love. Yet the emphasis is to be 
placed on the act itself and not on its explana- 
tions and conscious inspirations. 

Every man born in a Christian land is a 
debtor to the humanitarian spirit of Christian- 
ity. We all have received, and therefore it is 
incumbent on us to give. In a recent book, 
"Western Women in Eastern Lands," we read 
a story told by Dr. Dennis of the China In- 
land Mission. In the Christian hospital at 
Cheefoo a blind man had been operated on for 
a cataract and received back his sight. On 
his return home he found twenty blind men 
and put them all in a boat, which would take 
them to the same hospital where he had been 

I02 



a; Certain Samaritan 

cured. Another patient had a similar operation 
performed for him in the Hankow hospital. 
This man, on his return to his home town, 
found himself surrounded by a sad multitude 
of blind men, all clamoring- to know about 
his cure. Soon after that "a strange proces- 
sion of forty-eight blind men was formed, each 
holding a rope in the hand of the one before 
him ; and they then marched two hundred and 
fifty miles to Hankow, where nearly all were 
cured." This strange procession was lead on 
that long journey by the man who had his 
sight restored. The very core of the Christian 
religion is exposed in these acts. Having re- 
ceived great blessings, these Chinamen sought 
to make others partakers of the same benefits. 
It would have been despicable and traitorous 
conduct to refuse the helping hand to others. 
Our ambitions and desires should be in propor- 
tion as we ourselves have benefited by Jesus' 
teachings. 

An evangelist, in a certain city, came in con- 
tact with a young man who was persuaded 
concerning the gospel, and wished to confess 
faith in it, yet was afraid that his f ellow-work- 
103 



a Certain S)amaritan 

men in the mills might sneer at him if he 
took his step publicly. The evangelist urged 
the young man to act anyway, and assured 
him all would be well. About a year later 
the evangelist returned to the same city, and 
one of the first persons he met was this young 
man. 

"Do you remember me?" asked the youth. 

"Certainly I do !" the evangelist asserted 
heartily. "You were in our meetings last year, 
and hesitated before taking your stand for fear 
of the remarks of your companions. Tell me 
now, did you have a hard time of it?" 

The young man's face beamed as he replied : 
"No; not in the least!" Then he drew closer 
to the evangelist and whispered: "Why, do 
you know, the fellows down at the mill never 
even suspect that I'm a Christian!" 

We take it for granted that no one has any 
question concerning the utter worthlessness of 
that young man's Christianity. The same holds 
true of any man who has taken the obligations 
of membership in the Independent Order of 
Odd Fellows if the men he associates with do 
not even "suspect" it of him. 
104 



a Certain Samaritan 

The simple theology of Jesus' "A Certain 
Samaritan" is the theology which is needed in 
our day. Truly it would constitute a mighty 
solvent for the economic and industrial prob- 
lems that confront us as a nation. If the 
church does not feel herself called to enter ag- 
gressively into the arenas where to-day are 
fought the battles of the people against in- 
trenched plutocracy, arrogant political boss- 
ism, and nation-wide discrimination of the 
strong against the weak, at any rate, she should 
stand at the firing line and lend encouragement 
to her sons who are brave enough to throw 
down the gauntlet in behalf of a "square deal." 
Perhaps it is not the mission of the church to 
lead the forces of righteousness and humani- 
tarianism into the conflicts with great and 
wicked political and business giants of oppres- 
sion. But by the words of her divine Founder 
it is the church's solemn duty to deny shelter 
and comfort to such of her adherents as wish 
to believe that they can serve God without 
serving their fellow-men. It surely is the mis- 
sion of the church to instruct and to hearten 
those who do fight. If those who hope and 
105 



a; Cettafn ©amatitan 

pray and work for the coming of the King- 
dom of God on earth find the church harbor- 
ing and defending the traitors of mankind, 
or see the church cravenly silent concerning the 
supreme rehgiousness of deep brotherly love, 
can we wonder if men mistakenly spurn and 
curse her? 

If the church would drop the most of her 
efforts in behalf of a scheme of salvation, hav- 
ing to do only with the other world, and de- 
vote herself to the simplicity of Jesus' the- 
ology, within a decade she would set in mo- 
tion such militant enthusiasm for the better- 
ment of the conditions of industrial life that 
her primitive revolutionary power would be 
restored, and again Christianity would "turn 
the world upside down," as of old. 

The mission of the Samaritan of this story 
was altogether to the physical needs of the 
wounded traveller. Certainly there are other 
wounds of men which need ministering care. 
There are the wounds of heart and of soul 
which are crying out for the oil of comfort 
and the stimulating wine of sympathy. Yet 
these mental and spiritual needs of men must 
1 06 



a Certain ©amatftan 

not detract attention from their primal physi- 
cal needs. 

Jesus really cared about physical suffering. 
When he thought of the people being hungry, 
his care was for their physical comfort and 
well-being. He used his supernatural powers 
to produce both wine and bread. He healed 
the sick because pain of others gripped his 
nerves. It is no degrading of the gospel to 
make it applicable to the physical needs of men. 
The bread question is a religious question. 
If the Protective Tariff affects the cost of liv- 
ing without a corresponding increase of wages 
beyond the rate of mere subsistence, it is a re- 
ligious matter. At least, Jesus cared about the 
hunger and the suffering of men : his activity 
was not so "spiritual" and "other-worldly" 
that he disdained to descend from heights 
of religious rapture to a consideration of the 
needs of men's stomachs. A great deal of 
time spent in attempts to bolster up the authen- 
ticity and historicity of the Pentateuch might 
be devoted to the far more Christ-like occu- 
pation of battling for such political and indus- 
trial reforms as would immediately affect the 
107 



physical life of men, to preventing the spread 
of tuberculosis and pointing out God's reme- 
dies for its cure, to seeking relief from all man- 
ner of distress to which Jesus is subject in his 
fellow-men. The most of Jesus' work had to 
do with the life of men on this earth, and so 
should it be with our work. 

It is the duty of the church to lend the as- 
sistance of a pure white beacon-light and of a 
clear-toned bell to every craft that sets out 
from her shores to assist wrecked humanity. 
Only a political tyranny is afraid of the Car- 
bonari. Only an ecclesiastical despotism ful- 
minates against an organization she cannot 
control. 

The Samaritan has no message concerning 
sectarian and political affiliations. But the 
Samaritan cares intensely about every human 
suffering, and seeks to relieve it. 

The Samaritan was Christ's ideal man — a 
hero of Humanitarianism. 

THE END 



io8 



BROADWAY PUBUSHING CO'S 
NEWEST BOOKS 

All Bound in Silk Cloth and Gilt. Many Illustrated 
Fiction 

The Eyes at the Window (beautifully bound, with 

embossed jacket) — Olivia Smith Cornelius. . . .$i .50 

Next-Night Stories — C. J. Messer i ,25 

Arthur St. Clair of Old Fort Recovery— S. A. D. 

Whipple 1 . 50 

Barnegat Yarns — F. A. Lucas i . 00 

Jean Carroll, with six illustrations — John H. Case i . 50 

As a Soldier Would — Abner Pickering i . 50 

The Nut-Cracker, and Other Human Ape Fables — 

C. E. Blanchard, M.D i .00 

Moon-Madness, and Other Fantasies — Aim^e 

Crocker Gouraud (5th ed.) i . 00 

Sadie, or Happy at Last — May Shepherd i . 50 

Tweed, a Story of the Old South— S. M. Swales. . 1 .50 
The White Rose of the Miami— Mrs. E. W. 

Ammerman i . 50 

The Centaurians— Biagi i . 50 

The Reconstruction of Elinore Wood — Florenz S. 

Merrow i . 50 

A Nest of Vipers — Morgan D. Jones . . i .50 

Religious Works 

The Disintegrating Church — Frederick William 

Atkinson i .00 

Evolution of Belief — J. W. Gordon i . 50 

Down Hill and Up Hill — Rev. J. G. Anderson. . 2.00 

A Certain Samaritan — Rev. John Richelsen i . 00 

The Reunion of Christendom — Francis Goodman i . 50 
What the Church Is and What It Should Be— 

Lafayette Swindle i . 50 

A Harp of the Heart. (Poems) — Rev. Chas. 

Coke Woods i .00 

The Gospel Parables in Verse — Rev. Christopher 

Smith 75 

Who? Whence? Where? An Essay by Pedro 

Batista 1 . 00 

Compendium of Scriptural Truths — Marshall 

Smith 1.25 

The Passion Play at Ober Ammergau — Esse Esto 

Maplestone 1 . 00 

Israel Lo Ammi — Ida M. Nungasser i .00 



The Eternal Evangel — Solomon S. Hilscher $i .50 

A New Philosophy of Life — J. C. Coggins i . 00 

Romance of the Universe — B. T. Stauber i .50 

In the Early Days — Adelaide Hickox i , 50 

The New Theology — By a Methodist Layman — ■ 
Hamilton White i .00 

Miscellaneous 

Anvil Sparks — Radical Rhymes and Caustic 

Comments, by Wilby Heard 75 

The Medical Expert and Other Papers — Louis J. 

Rosenberg 50 

The Little Sufferers (dealing with the Abuses of 

the Children's Societies) — G. Martin i .50 

Eureka, a Prose Poem — S. H. Newberry i .00 

Rust (a play in four acts) — Algernon Tassin (of 

Columbia University) i . 00 

Poems by Charles Guinness i . 00 

Prohibition and Anti-Prohibition — Rommel, 

Ziegler & Herz i . 00 

Gay Gods and Merry Mortals — ^Verse by Robert J. 

Shores i . 00 

The Rubaiyat of the College Student — Ned Nafe .50 
The Deluge of England, and Other Poems — James 

Francis Thierry 1 , 00 

The Dragon's Teeth — a Philosophical and Eco- 
nomic Work — T. M. Sample i .00 

Achsah, the Sister of Jairus — Mabel Cronise 

Jones 1 .00 

The Marriage Bargain Counter — Daisy Deane . . i . 50 
Building a New Empire — Nathaniel M. Ayers. . 1.50 

Marriage and Divorce — Jeanette Laurance i . 00 

The Clothespin Brigade — Clara L. Smiley 75 

"Forget It" — Ida Von Claussen i .50 

The Last Word: a Philosophical Essay — James 

and Mary Baldwin i . 00 

Travel 

Eight Lands in Eight Weeks (illustrated by 90 
drawings) — Marcia P. Snyder i . 25 

Eliza and Etheldreda in Mexico— Patty Guthrie 
(illustrated) i .25 

The attention of clergymen is directed to our Religious List, one 
of the largest of any house in America. 

Write for free copy of our magazine, BOOK CHAT. 

BROADWAY PUBLISfflNG CO., 835 BROADWAY, N. Y. 

Branch Offices: 

ATLANTA BALTIMORE ENDIANAPOLIS NORFOLK 

WASHINGTON DES MOINES, IOWA 



JUL 29 ISII 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: August 2005 

PreservationTechnologies 

A loRLD LEADErTn PAPER PRESERVATION 

111 Thomson Park Dnve 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724) 779-21 1 1 



One copy del. to Cat. Div. 

AUG 8 ^^'- 



